I'm not so sure that I see the controversy, as I generally agree with Ayden's view of ICANN.
I was at the first-ever Canadian IGF yesterday, whose keynote was Elliot Noss triumphantly glowing over the power of multistakeholderism to put governments in their place. It was all I could do to break out laughing. The raw sense of entitlement, and the assertion that the "community" that shows up at ICANN meetings is the only one that matters in Internet decision making is ludicrous, and is maintained at high risk.
What ICANN calls governance can best be described not as multistakeholderism so much as "the inmates are running the asylum". In a later Canadian IGF session on disinfirmation, the head of policy at Facebook Canada went into the "trust us, we're doing all we can" mantra that many of us have heard so many times. The pattern is unambiguous, whether it's Facebook, Tucows or anyone else in the "community". Left to govern themselves, the Internet is becoming less safe in its content and less safe in its infrastructure.
So, again,. please indicate what's so shocking in what Ayden said. I may not share the common view of who the "bad actors" are.
- Evan