At 03:50 11/04/2008, Danny Younger wrote:

JFC: I would like to respond to this remark:

Dear Danny, Your position at NCUC as well as your position here is smartly defamatory. This at least makes it much more interesting (and destructive) than the same jeremiads that are made by so many people who hope that by repeating the same stupidity that it will eventually make it true. An intelligent paradigmatic error I will address this with care because, as I said, it is intelligently formulated and because I think it is the very basis of the wrong world approach that your likes are imposing on ICANN. Moreover, because you seem to be attacking france@large certification, just as you did with the Intlnet NCUC due membership. The real problem regards what you think to be efficient for disseminating a message in our current world. Meaning, of course, the world's paradigm. My real job as a searcher is to investigate that. My action as an activist is to prevent the old heliocentric decentralized Copernican paradigm from over-delaying the progressively, universally accepted, but only partly worked-out yet ontocentric, distributed paradigm. In a transition period you have several attitudes from people that are dumbly attached to the "old world" ways to those people that dream of a "new world". The most interesting ones are the pragmatic and intelligent ones (I consider them both to be equal, but this is just related to their method of considering reality). You are a dedicated pragmatic. You share this with a part of the people on this mailing list, because I would say that it is the root of the Anglo-Saxon language and culture. This is the source of inductive reasoning. In addition, you are an American with a rather particular legal/tax related perception about what an NGO or foundation is. I am an intelligent debugger. I use the term intelligent in the pragmatic meaning that you should easily understand: with good intelligence within my environment. What Mao describes as being like a fish in water and most other people on this list, as being Internet activists, feel they are in an Internet @large environment. I am a debugger because my interest in life is to understand how things work in order to make them work to the benefit of our fellow humans, and not to constrain them. I give this the ethitechnics name. As opposed to technoethics, which seeks to know how to ethically use technology. My interest is in how to build technology and technocracy in order for them to act ethically. A core documented main issue Before going any further here, I want to show you that this is in fact the very core of our debate. ALAC is the civil society branch of ICANN in the WSIS environment. This is obviously, from your previous posts, something that you have some xenolergic difficulty understanding and cannot accept the need to pay for it. This has a very clear translation in the "dogmas" of our mutual cultural structures. (1) ISOC is pragmatic, it says that there is an Internet network, in which there are users. The ISOC evolution that they propose to switch from a network centric vision to a user centric one. This is a huge step ahead in the right direction. However, it still comes with the underlying idea that there is a network and the users are the users of that network. This means that Danny Younger may have ideas, may work a lot on his own, but he still is an ISOC Member that is trying to tell ICANN how to curboppose ALAC. To that end he joined an NCUC where he does _not_ belong (since ISOC is a user association) and he opposes structures such as mines because they are _too_ pertinent to NCUC. (2) WSIS is intelligent (in the meaning of interlinking that I use). It says that there are people and they need to have their networks being computer-assisted. They only state that the "Information Society" is a "network centric, a caractere humain, centrada en la persona". People are not a menu where one has to choose between "Google, MSN, Yahoo!, etc.". They are people who can decide what they want and can best organize the different purposes that they may diversely share. Their network is not decentralized with a root hierarchy. They are distributed in an heterarchic world. (3) ICANN is to choose. We could discuss all this for years, in turn analyzing the difference between the rules of the game and of efficiency in your and my world paradigms. The science of efficiency is precisely named cybernetics (Wienner, Coufignal). Basically, we see the method, the system, the achievements in your structural approach as well as mine. My legal and historical environment Now, about my organizations. I have been living with our new paradigm for decades because this was my job. When I started co-deploying the international packet switch network with Robert Trehin and Bill Combs, I had a very practical problem: some of the operators (such as Larry Roberts' Telenet) were commercial competitors of the Tymnet network that I worked for. In order to legally have the right to talk to all of them, I created the Intlnet NGO (named SEAT at the time) 30 years ago this August. Its mission was exactly the same as ICANN. However, its strategy was not to foster "competition" (or even coopetition) in coordinating it, but rather to foster e-empowerment in assisting. It was based upon a very simple recipe: if you want to be the boss, be the servant. A very efficient one. A recipe another one understood very well: Jon Postel. Intlnet is my IANA. The IANA operates in a centralized way for a decentralized system, and Intlnet works as a catalyst for a distributed system. I have the chance to live in a country where the law has prepared for that. A non-profit organization is incorporated in minutes, nearly for free, and has a very protective, 107 years proven, rather adaptative legal framework . A French (Belgium, Swiss, etc.) association is a democratic organization that calls for two persons in order to be created under Governmental administrative control and the democratic governance of its members (the Members are the authority, the Chair is only a responsible legal interface). This makes a real difference with your own culture wherein a single person can create a corporation and an NGO is only a non-profit (or even a no-Member) corporation variant. BTW, no-Member organizations were made illegal in France in the very first vote of the National Assembly, describing them as anti-democratic. The draught back is that would the IETF be French sock puppet claims and RFC authors in disguise could not be an issue. My own working method Intlnet for 30 years has specialized in a very quick, simple, and robust way to legally e-empower people governances. Its services set out to catalyze concepts, intermediate people, provide bylaws, register, protect domain names, provide rub-stamps and business cards, offer free sites, cross-pollinate ideas, build synergies, animate think-tanks, protect the future against unwise current day constraints, such as seen in the IETF and ISO, and mostly to be a referential information gathering and disseminating secretariat. It had to become something so automatic that a networked single person (Plato's Kubernetes) can easily offer it. Such persons today include me and several youngsters who will take over and add specialized structural features (domain name management [world@wide], publishing [epistole], etc.). Others in the Intlnet space are Palto's "livings", who share the relations, advice, punctual help, and money. This is not a hierarchical structure with a deciding BoD with many sleeping members. This is an archipelago to support active concerted actions. No one is "coordinating". How you have harmed us for years You were, therefore, totally correct (in your misreading of the NCUC): Intlnet is not another ISOC. This is precisely why it belongs to NCUC. You are also totally correct in stating that france@large is not another ISOC Chapter. It is simply a kernel association that I created in 2000 with other ICANN @large French candidates; not to lead or represent French @large people (which belongs to your paradigm), but to serve the people (this is our paradigm and the one that the Internet is all about) who voted for us. Because of the way ICANN GA first correctly understood its mission under Roberto, in spite of Harald's restrictive vision, and misunderstood (according us) its mission under you, because you were one of the disrupters of IDNO, and of our icannatlarge.org effort, because you blocked us an NCUC and prevented us to help ICANN in the IDN field, and because Intlnet had many other things to do (mainly the MDRS project and its support of the MLTF [multilinguistics and IDN issues]) and low resources, it asked me to keep the interface with the old Internet world, and I put france@large asleep. This made me singularly conduct a successful weak to strong strategy at the IETF concerning the Multilingual and Semantic Internet issue and to win at ISO (where they refused, I came with some of my Members to the ISO, ICANN, and Intlnet meeting that we organized last year). They are so afraid that I am not a one-man-show that ISO included six people, ICANN two, and Intlnet only one that was invited [actually they joined forces against me, so... but the resulting vote supported my "one man show" since in the whole word only USA, UK and Ireland opposed my language strategy] Now, one of our Members has joined the IETF because they banned me for leading them to publish a consensusthat they disliked. They block him from claiming that he is a clone of me because he _thinks_ the same as me Never mind, we already have enough of them registered on the IETF IDN list wherein they want to ban the WSIS world consensual positions that we only support. The real is issue is singular growth vs. plural diversity. The old paradigm is about growth by one centralized and then decentralized authority (often associated with the USA, but this is more subtle). The new paradigm is about distribution throughout countries, cultures, languages, and people. God said "grow and multiply". It is, therefore, normal that you are accusing us of being single. And that we use diversity to try to make you understand. france@large When, the new ALAC VP Sebastien Bachollet's proposition to welcome ICANN in Paris was accepted, Intlnet decided to catalyze the revival of france@large. It reestablished its structure: it was, as usual a kernel service support of a mailing list, to help the French @large community to gather and benefit from the ICANN meeting to develop. In 2000, it had welcomed the German @large European BoD Member at the French Parliament, with the BC and AFNIC,, and introduced - in a famous answer to ICANN taken back China and Viet-Nam.- many of the topics of the WSIS As a first action, france@large launched and currently manages the concept of the "World Internet Week de Paris" (http://wiw.de-paris.info"), which has been accepted by everyone for spurring the participating event's PR synergies. However, we cannot provide for its full deployment (with a professional site and relations with the new assigned Minister of the Internet) because, to be of any use to ICANN and ALAC, france@large first has to be accredited as an ALS, and you are delaying that process. Tomorrow I have a meeting with six people that are coming from various places in France in order to organize the site and other events. It is laregly being hampered by this incertitude that you are creating, which is leading Nick to in turn delay things. I truly hope that I will not have to cancel it. I have a meeting on Tuesday at noon wherein we will decide whether or not to dedicate a part-time person to france@large. This is why I stated that your "smart" yet outdated type of action is harming us and costing us dearly (these people are paying for their travel and the part-time candidate is voluntary: one of the reasons why Intlnet is able to survive is that we closed its bank account a long ago.). I have experimented with it in the field for years now: I do not claim here that I am right, but I know that your method and positions are somewhat inappropriate, and you have become a (unfortunately rather efficient) ward working disruptive pain for us. I am afraid we are not alone feeling that way. Cheers. jfc

"In a system where Danny Younger can decide as a non-legitimate NCUC member (as ISOC NY he represents an individual users organisation) impeach the adhesion of my non-profit services oriented organisation to its consituency (NCUC) the system is flawed in terms of democratic representativity."

When applications are tendered for membership in the NCUC, members will volunteer to perform the requisite due diligence. Upon examining the bona fides presented and other documentation, I came to the conclusion that the application was submitted by an individual rather than by an organization. My assessment was forwarded to the Executive Committee that reviewed and agreed with my conclusions (and that still offered you an opportunity to refute the conclusions that I had reached). As the Committee was not persuaded by either your application or your refutation, membership was not granted (as the NCUC is set up to accomodate organizations, not individuals).

Perhaps you will have some luck in convincing the ALAC that france@large is an organization with an actual membership. As for me, I have my doubts as to whether you actually have an organization -- not that it bothers me too much as the At-Large was always supposed to be about individuals (until the ALAC perverted the concept). So whether you will or won't be an ALS, it makes little difference to me as long as there continues to be merit in your comments and as long as we can continue to benefit from your contributions.

... and frankly, I have grown used to the presence of those on our lists that pretend to have organizations and pretend to be organizational spokesmen... so whatever the ultimate disposition of your latest application I will still welcome your messages.

regards, Danny

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

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