Stakeholderism is NOT an idea that organizations, not people, matter.

Stakeholderism is in NO WAY a regressive idea, it is progressive.  It is not at all in conflict with the principle of democracy.

Democracy is inclusive,  but works only through political and legislative hierarchies.

Stakeholderism is NOT exclusionary.  It actually expands the Democratic process beyond rigid hierarchies of representation.

In a democratic system nearly every
competent living person of sufficient age has an automatic right to participate, but his participation can only be by representation. In the stakeholder process, participation is more direct.

These are comments on the Opening paragraph of the article.

It is easy to view the Multistakeholder process with prejudice, because it is new and evolving, has it's initial gaps, but if there is a next level of democracy, it is the multistakeholder process.

Sivasubramanian M

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018, 8:21 PM Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
So happy to see you in this conversation Karl. 

For those who don't know Karl Auerbach, my first deep dive into the ICANN phenomenon found me reading Karl Auerbach and Michael Froomkin. Over the years since 2007, I've had several conversations with Karl on numerous topics. Those interactions have always been illuminating and thought-provoking.   

For those of you who might wish to deepen your understanding of the ICANN phenomenon, I would also recommend Auerbach's paper "Stakeholderism - The Wrong Road for Internet Governance". 

-Carlton 

==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================


On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 9:51 PM Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote:

Carlton, you are as sane and clear eyed as you have always been.  Yes,
ICANN quacks like a regulatory body and walks like a regulatory body.

(Which I guess means that ICANN is a duck?)

I agree with you that ICANN regulates - it controls, allocates, revokes,
and levies fees.  It also shares some other attributes with regulatory
bodies: It is effectively unavoidable and its decisions have ripples
that go far beyond those whose actions are directly shaped by the body.

As Even L. pointed out ICANN may have legal reasons to try to fend away
the word "regulator".  That's not surprising, but that kind of wordplay
is approaching an exercise of Orwellian Newspeak.  And it's nothing new
to ICANN: back in year 2000 they tried to label a thing that was clearly
an "election" as something else called a "selection" in an attempt to
evade California laws regarding the obligations of non-profit/public
benefit corporations.

One has to wonder why are intelligent people so afraid to use a
description that so clearly applies?

Well, perhaps it is because there is fear of that word reviving a long
unanswered question.

As you mention, ICANN shapes internet domain name policies and
economics, and even charges "fees" that everyone would agree would be
called "taxes" if levied by a governmental body.

A better way to put this is to say that ICANN restrains some trade and
encourages other trade.  I used that former phrase because it tends to
raise the question of "what provides ICANN with immunity from anti-trust
laws"?

This paper from year 2003 still remains largely unanswered:
http://osaka.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/icann-antitrust.pdf

By-the-way, with regard to the vistaprint TLD and the discussion of
ICANN application fees - I went through the round a few years ago and
did the better part of 100 applications, with each being an almost
identical application with only a couple of pages of different marketing
info.  Yet we got hit with the full $185,000 charge for each one of
those even though the review for each was essentially identical.  It
made me feel that as between ICANN and a highway robber saying "stand
and deliver" that the latter was less blameworthy.

        --karl--



On 07/13/2018 05:44 PM, Carlton Samuels wrote:
> It really isn't a personal opinion; the facts are undeniable by virtue
> of the admitted regulatory signs.
>
> It is in ICANN's power to gift a resource, set the requirements by which
> one can be gifted, set the rules for use of resource, charge and punish
> violations of the rules as appropriate and exact a fee for gifting that
> resource.  Anywhere else in Christendom and the known sensate world,
> those activities are the very definition of a regulator.
>
> ICANN has managed to convince itself and would wish to make
> accommodating idiots of the rest of us because it is politically
> difficult to do otherwise. I get the politics of it. But to ask me to
> deny the evidence of my two lying eyes and what is plainly the case in
> reason and judgment is a bridge too far. The Christian bible has a line
> in it "in Christ all things are possible". I would add a caution to that
> declaration:  Save and except to take me for an idiot.
>
> -Carlton
>
> ==============================
> /Carlton A Samuels/
> /Mobile: 876-818-1799
> Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround/
> =============================
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 4:13 PM Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com
> <mailto:kankaili@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Indeed Goran has said "ICANN is not a regulator" many times.  I have
>     heard him saying that myself.  However, this is something I disagree
>     with him.
>
>     Again, in my personal opinion, as long as the positioning of ICANN
>     stays blurry as it is now, the confusion will only accumulate until
>     it creats a crisis.
>
>     Kaili
>
>
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: "Johan Helsingius" <julf@julf.com <mailto:julf@julf.com>>
>     To: <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>     <mailto:at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>
>     Sent: Friday, July 13, 2018 8:33 PM
>     Subject: Re: [At-Large] [lac-discuss-en] Vistaprint is abandoning .vista
>
>
>      > On 12-07-18 19:56, Kan Kaili wrote:
>      >> In my opinion, ICANN should play the role of a regulator.
>      >
>      > Our esteemed CEO, Göran Marby, has a number of phrases he repeats
>      > fairly often. "ICANN is not a regulator" is one of them.
>      >
>      > Julf
>      >
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > At-Large mailing list
>      > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>     <mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>      > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>      >
>      > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>     _______________________________________________
>     At-Large mailing list
>     At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>     <mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>     https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
>     At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list
At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org