I don't share the "he's wreaking our multi-stakeholder-ism" that has shown up in several excited posts to the list. Fadi's an employee with some insight, and post-mortem reports are generally useful. As I recall he incautiously said he'd fix the whois mess the first time he spoke on the record as the Corporation's CEO/President. I expect normal failings, and my expectations are, in this instance, met.

(1) Is "agency capture" a mere hypothetical? I'd the impression that VGRS was generally successful in its post-98 efforts to write the rules it is obliged to follow, and their market share is ... not greatly changed. Staff did a very nice analysis of Constituency votes at the Paris meeting, capture is not a distant hypothetical.

(2) If not California and its courts, then where? What could "the project of globalization we all started" mean if it is the alternative to some jurisdiction, say, the state the Corporation is domiciled in? When we started IDN (courtesy of VGRS's march stealing "testbed"), when we held meetings in just about every corner of the globe (yes, I know, globes don't actually have corners), when we ... at what point did this become leaving the legal certainty (and comfort) of Hotel California?

(3) Why on earth is allowing the existing IANA Functions Contract to expire fatally fused with exiting California and fatally fused with spilling all or some of the Corporation Board and ...

Getting to a form of governance that works better than what we've managed since '98 seems like a worth while goal. Trying to do that by blindly jumping over not one, but three or more high hurdles, simultaneously, is not likely to achieve that end.

Eric Brunner-Williams
Eugene, Oregon


>>FADI CHEHADE:  THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME AND ALL OF US TO COME AND TAKE SOME TIME WITH YOU.  I WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH THREE SUBSTANTIVE POINTS.

THE FIRST ONE, WHATEVER WE DO, MAKE YOUR KEY PRINCIPLE THE AVOIDANCE OF CAPTURE.  IT IS CRITICAL.  IT IS HOW WE HOLD TO THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER MODEL.  IF WE ARE CAPTURED OR IF WE CREATE A MODEL THAT ALLOWS FOR CAPTURE BY SPECIAL INTERESTS OR SPECIAL AGENDAS, IN MY OPINION, THE ICANN WE WERE ALL HANDED WOULD HAVE BEEN RUINED.

TWO, WATCH CAREFULLY FOR ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES THAT REFOCUS AND ANCHOR ICANN IN THE CALIFORNIA COURTS AS OPPOSED TO CONTINUING THE PROJECT OF GLOBALIZATION WE ALL STARTED.  WATCH FOR THAT.
IF ALL ROADS END THERE, THAT'S ONE THING.  BUT IF ALL ROADS START AT THE COURTS, WE HAVE A PROBLEM.  SO THIS IS THE DISTINCTION.

ARE THE COURTS THE FINAL POINT OF ENFORCEMENT OR ARE THEY THE FIRST POINT OF ENFORCEMENT?  ASK YOURSELF THIS QUESTION AS YOU WATCH THE VARIOUS MODELS.  AND THIS IS CRITICAL.

THE GOOD NEWS IS OUR COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS THAT, AND I THINK MANY OF YOU GOVERNMENTS WHO HAVE TALKED TO ME HAVE VOICED YOUR CONCERN WITH A CALIFORNIA SYSTEM OR COURT SYSTEM BECOMING OUR FIRST  RECOURSE.

AND THE THIRD POINT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU BEFORE I LEAVE IS NOT TO FORGET WHY WE'RE DOING ALL OF THIS.  I THINK IT WAS VERY CLEAR WHEN ALL THESE GROUPS WERE CREATED THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A TRANSITION WORK.  THE QUESTION WAS ASKED WHEN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT IS NO LONGER IN ITS STEWARDSHIP ROLE AS THE BACKSTOP OF THE COMMUNITY, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO REPLACE THAT?  THAT WAS THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED.  AND, THEREFORE, AS THINGS GET PILED ON, THE TEST YOU SHOULD USE IS IS THIS NECESSARY TO REPLACE THE BACKSTOP ROLE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT?

IF WE DON'T DO THAT, THEN WE WILL WATCH OUR TRANSITION SLIP AWAY, SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD BE A SHAME.

WE WOULD LIKE ICANN TO BECOME AN INDEPENDENT MULTISTAKEHOLDER ORGANIZATION.  THIS IS THE MOMENT.