Ever considered writing for the Economist?
From my personal perspective. As an individual Internet user I can't reclaim ICANN expenses so every £1000 spent actually costs c.£1400 in pre tax revenue. Those who turn up for business of course can reclaim if they make a profit with corporate taxes at c.10% this means they save around £100 in tax and keep the £1400 of pre tax personal income for themselves as well.
This might give some clue as to why ICANN drove so fast to be a business orientated organisation. Christian JFC Morfin wrote:
At 12:02 13/01/2014, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
So why are so many people spending so much money and time on ICANN?
No one is actually spending time on ICANN.
ICANN is making us waste time for 15 years for only one single thing: they want to be a monopolistic blahblahblah-tax collector in a subsidiary world. For that they objectively network with tax-evaders to support them IRT the other tax collectors. The problem they face is that - as you documents it - ICANN is of absolute no use to tax payers, but of some use to tax evaders, due to minor errors by tax evader sponsored standardizers and to fellow RIRs if IPv6 is maintained in its "a la" IPv4 chaos and LISP is not deployed.
Up to now these errors were considered as mistakes that could hamper the internet instead of making it work better. Now they are considered as paradigmatic advantages for the internet to sell better (the RFC 6852 "huge bounty" tax evaders cooperation being coordinated by ICANN as being the sole unique internet body with a banking account).
Sao Paulo was initially discussed as a tax evader sponsored techies and tax collectors meeting. ICANN has managed for it to actually be between them as the world's blahblahblah-tax collector and other tax collectors.
In both cases tax payers are kept out of the loop. They are now to decide if, in a tax payer centered society they bother so much about tax evaders and blahblahblah-tax collectors, and wants to stay bogged down in their unique governance (the Internet BUG to be fixed or not?).
jfc