At 12:47 06/06/2008, Thomas Roessler wrote:
On 2008-06-06 06:41:34 -0400, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Not that JFC was self-nominating Sebastien, which of course is ridiculous.
It would explain a lot, though. (sorry, Sebastien, couldn't resist) -- Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
Dear Thomas and all, This joke should help all of you understand how ALAC management may be perceived by new and candid new commers. france@large is certainly the most advanced, concerned and involved lose net of @large people. They do not focus on ICANN they consider as a set of cons and pros. They focus on their own personal interests which is networked with the interests of others. In life, business, culture, language, etc. etc. including the Internet. They also are an advanced group of people in terms of grassroots evolution of the Internet and probably one of the few ALS having an Internet usage architectural alternative under way, liaising with the IETF, and active at the IGF level (local, european and worldwide). This is why I personnally pushed them to welcome ICANN and enter ALAC. Their reasoning is simple : 1. ALAC does not want us. Why to bother about them. We are on a technical trend to societally by-pass them. I agree with them, but, they do not necessarily evaluate correctly the anglosaxon legacy we also have to support, the same as the anglo-saxon world does not evaluate what is needed and developping in the rest of the world. Making this understood by both sides is difficult. 2. This made I could not be a candidate to Euralo, and we cannot vote in Paris. They know they are legitimate and that all this would be administratively settled had I called upon the Ombudsman or/and the BoD, instead of trusting Wolf and waiting to see him in Paris. Wolf did not help in disregrading our invitation to the diner we planned at Saff suggestion. They infered there would have a closed BoF. To calm this, I nominated Sebastien as the only ALAC person knowing the issues we are dealing with (I underlined I could not do it). 4. the very unfortunate comment of Staff on "self-nomination" came on top of all this. It shows they equal Sebastien's positions with ours. Everyone know we a very friendly with ISOC but very different too. Your comment adds to it :-) ! They deduce the feud is by "merchant concepts" (as per the IAB RFC 3869) - they daily suffer from in their france@large endeavours, and against the "Internet French/WSIS/people centric concepts". For everyone to better undestand, I quote IAB (two years ago): "The principal thesis of this document [RFC 3869] is that if commercial funding is the main source of funding for future Internet research, the future of the Internet infrastructure could be in trouble. In addition to issues about which projects are funded, the funding source can also affect the content of the research, for example, towards or against the development of open standards, or taking varying degrees of care about the effect of the developed protocols on the other traffic on the Internet." The solution proposed by IAB are: non-commercial R&D funding by Governements (US mainly) or @large. The USG has not followed and said US industry should be the funding source. Some IETF geeks then switched to Google or Yahoo! france@large wen excluded but sucessfully opposed (at IETF, ISO, SMSI) some of their most contentious positions. A few days ago, france@large has closed a mutual de facto understanding with the IETF/WG-IDNABIS over IDNA/ML-DNS. In our mind, it should help a smooth transition from a cahotic and born dead Internationalised Internet to a stable Multilngual Internet, and permit the emergence of the Semantic Internet. You may understand why they are upset and now laughing at the ALAC/Staff's attitude. The question I constantly have is "what did they produced, whet did they help?. For ten years I tell ICANN "let get real". Then Esther Dyson said the same. Many will say the same in coming months and two years (JPA and IGF understanding of ICANN). There is a place for ICANN in the world digital and semantic ecosystem supported by the Internet. This role can only be introduced and made credible to users by ALAC, as the ICANN own's users. Otherwise there will be a split, the USG/ICANN dreaming of a new world shape and the world building itself differently ...until there is a US/World interoperability clash. The Internet is an interconnected computer assisted people's network, the IETF only wants to influence the design, use and management for it to work better along its own values [RFC 3935]. This means it really is what the people think how it is built. ICANN is a regulating organisationware tool for these computers. People can keep using it, people can feel it is a bug. People will decide from what they gather from @larges, as their nearest technical/legal pole of responsible and authoritative competence. jfc