Re: [At-Large] FCC TO SCRAP NET NEUTRALITY
I note your lack of response concerning financial interests, and a lack of response concerning income diversity. While all are welcome to comment on these matters, the voice of a small nondiverse group cannot dominate the discussion, since they do not represent the interests of the majority of internet users, no matter how many years of experience they claim. While some may claim that a few emails on this list suffices for a full policy discussion, this is incorrect. What I am calling for is a formal discussion concerning the impact of fcc nn policy on icann, something the narrow, non minority and financially compromised group seems to fear. We are not talking about a discussion on celestial mechanics. Any claim that we are is both incorrect and immature. On Dec 6, 2017 2:56 PM, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org> wrote: On 6 December 2017 at 14:07, William Michael Cunningham < williamcunningham840@gmail.com> wrote:
A reading of the FCC Net Neutrality order clearly reveals how impactful this order will be on ICANN's stated mission and goals.
Still waiting for specific examples..... A focus on technical aspects of the operation of the Internet's
identifiers is incorrect.
Readers are invited to consult the ICANN bylaws. That focus *is* its mandate.
"Security and Stability"
It's easy to toss buzzwords out of context. ICANN's mandate is "stability and security *of the DNS*" Still waiting for any credible link between the NN discussions and that.
I suggest a formal process for obtaining opinions from the At-large group about perspective on the proposed FCC policy, not short circuiting discussion by listening to the opinions of a small group of insiders.
Hint: The "small group of insiders" are also part of "the At-large group". Does their opinion count for less? Perhaps being a "insider" suggests an actual understanding of how and why ICANN works as it does? Does anyone think that such dreaded "insider" input might actually be helpful in determining a position that won't be blown off as irrelevant?
In other words, why don't we ask people what they think, instead of telling them that the FCC policy is irrelevant?
The question got put out. And some people -- including a few with decades worth of experience and understanding of ICANN -- responded that the FCC policy is irrelevant to it. Still waiting on *evidence* to the contrary. This group is also welcome to solicit opinions and then take a vote on whether the sun will rise tomorrow. Cheers, - Evan
the voice of a small nondiverse group cannot dominate the discussion, since they do not represent the interests of the majority of internet users, no matter how many years of experience they claim.
Proof?
What I am calling for is a formal discussion concerning the impact of fcc nn policy on icann, something the narrow, non minority and financially compromised group
Non-minority? Isn't that ... majority?
seems to fear.
All I continue to see is fact-free posturing, devoid of logic or evidence. At this point a number of emotions besides fear come to mind. Amusement, mainly. Still waiting for that evidence. Hard to have a useful discussion without fact and evidence at hand. Cheers, - Evan PS: Calling those of us who oppose this nonsense "financially compromised", without evidence, constitutes personal attack. I request an apology or I will escalate this violation.
Evan, On 06.12.2017, at 22:41, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote: PS: Calling those of us who oppose this nonsense "financially compromised", without evidence, constitutes personal attack. I request an apology or I will escalate this violation. Why do you care? This thread reminds me of the old Jeff Williams days - once every attempt has been made to bring the discussion on a rational level, where questions are asked and properly answered, there is no point to argue further. We all on this list know you (at least the financially compromised and fearful folks like me and the other non-minority folks) and respect you regardless whether we have same or different ideas on specific points. As a former Chair of the DNSO GA, my advice is to let the personal attacks pass by and fade into irrelevance, and save your much appreciated keystrokes for more important issues. Cheers, Roberto
Hi Roberto, my advice is to let the personal attacks pass by and fade into irrelevance, and save your much appreciated keystrokes for more important issues. Points very well made. Consider your advice taken; there are indeed better uses of my time. The Williams reference made me smile. And thanks for the kind words. Have a great Christmas. - Evan
participants (3)
-
Evan Leibovitch -
Roberto Gaetano -
William Michael Cunningham