At 21:39 09/01/2009, Franck Martin wrote:
And your views are tainted by a desire of having ICANN to fail, so you too have a conflict of Interest, but I think it makes a good equilibrium on the list.
on another note: we do not live in a perfect world. I think comes a time, when someone has to say, enough consultations and let's do it. The economist likes to publish rating of countries based on how easy it is to do business in these countries because how slow is the administration.
This is ICANN precautionary duty. ICANN plays its survival. There is no mystery: if ICANN's Internet for the Rich strategy fails there will be an international recovery alternative, which may take one year. But that recovery will most probably not be an ICANN plan B [which is not even considered], and - I am sure of it - will not keep ICANN in the way it sees itself today. The question for us (lead and end users) is: what is the worst case? - the collapse of the Internet for the Rich, - or the ICANN continuation. Until to six months ago I would have said: the collapse. Today I am obliged to say the ICANN continuation: they are those who have chosen to support the single virtual root, the money oriented Internet for the Rich strategy rather than a QoS oriented multilaterally concerted strategy. "tant va la cruche à l'eau ..." jfc