Greg,

I think it's a good idea to revisit your statement ...
"More specifically, ownership of .ORG by a non-profit has a nice symmetry to it.  It's easy to like, people are used to it, and it may even stop bad things from happening.  But ... there is no reason to presume that ownership by a non-profit is truly in the best interests of .ORG, its users or the general public.  If there's a reason to say that ownership by Ethos Capital will serve those interests well, it will need to come from facts and action (much of it from Ethos, PIR and even ISOC); we can't presume that either."

I believe it's a mistake to dismiss the organized grassroots resistance to the Ethos/iSOC transaction with the comment "It's easy to like, people are used to it, and it may even stop bad things from happening".

There's a principle that's emerging from highly respected community members including well respected people like Esther Dyson and Katherine Maher. The principle is "End users benefit from a long-term commitment to the open and noncommercial internet".

There's also historical precedence that this principle was achieved in practice when ICANN gave the stewardship of PIR to iSOC in 2003. 

End users have enjoyed a long history of benefitting from an open and noncommercial internet ... linux.org, Free Software Foundation (www.fsf.org), wikipedia.org ... and on ... and on. This is a fundamental aspect of the Internet that benefits end users. It's important that this benefit to end users is acknowledged ... and protected. It's not simply a warm fuzzy feeling. Benefits to end users of an open and noncommercial internet are real and often threatened by commercial interests. 

The propose $1 Billion transaction between Ethos and iSOC breaks the principle of ICANN's longterm commitment to a open and noncommercial interest entrusted to iSOC in 2003. It's more than just "nice symmetry" as you state. 

I think At-Large's reputation would benefit if we acknowledge the well established benefits that end users receive from "a long term commitment to the open and noncommercial internet" in any statement that comes out of this discussion. 

Cheers!
David 





On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 5:31 PM Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> wrote:
I agree that our voice needs to be heard.  But what is that voice going to say?

The Malthouse piece is a terrible blueprint for what that voice should be saying.  Frankly, it's misguided and even offensive.  If anything, we should be pushing back on it -- but by putting out different and better ideas, not by getting into a flame war.

I don't support a hasty conclusion that the public interest aspect of .ORG is being abandoned (easily or not).  At best, there is cause for concern.  But a rush to judgment is not the way to deal with those concerns.  We have the opportunity to frame the discussion, by asking solid, well-grounded questions, by proposing some principles/guideposts, and by providing advice on how to resolve these concerns -- which could mean a sale that allays our concerns and that goes through, or a sale that substantiates our concerns and doesn't go through.

More specifically, ownership of .ORG by a non-profit has a nice symmetry to it.  It's easy to like, people are used to it, and it may even stop bad things from happening.  But ... there is no reason to presume that ownership by a non-profit is truly in the best interests of .ORG, its users or the general public.  If there's a reason to say that ownership by Ethos Capital will serve those interests well, it will need to come from facts and action (much of it from Ethos, PIR and even ISOC); we can't presume that either.  

We need to be the voice of the end-user, a voice of reason, and a voice for the public interest.  We need to sort the wheat from the chaff.  We may want to have our own meeting with ISOC, PIR and Ethos to get at the facts and dispel the myths.  As ALAC/At-Large, we have the platform to ask for that.

If we join the pitchfork-and-torches crowd, we lose our unique voice and place in the ecosystem.  We become followers, not leaders.  We become enablers (and even spreaders) of FUD, rather than dispellers of FUD.

So, let's find our voice.  But first we need to find our collective thoughts.

Best regards,

Greg


Greg Shatan
President, ISOC-NY
"The Internet is for everyone"


On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 4:50 PM Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:

I am afraid I am starting to feel this way as well. The end user voice that we are here to provide is becoming a glaring absence. And we need to do more than ask for a seat on the PIR board. We should be joining our voice to others asking why and how the public interest aspect of this corner of the ecosystem can be so easily abandoned.

Marita 

On 1/8/2020 4:33 AM, Vittorio Bertola via CPWG wrote:

Il 2020-01-07 22:22 lists@christopherwilkinson.eu ha scritto:

 
The main reason why almost 20 years ago we fought to create the ALAC and preserve some form of user representation in ICANN after the cancellation of the original At Large election mechanism was exactly to guarantee a voice for the global public interest of billions of Internet users, against possible capture or failure of ICANN's industry self-regulation model. I have rarely seen a case in which that global interest is so clear, so uniformly shared across the community and so loudly voiced. IMHO, failing to act in this case would easily become evidence in favour of those who challenge ALAC's usefulness and ability to fulfill its mission.
 
-- 
vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
-------->        now blogging & more at http://bertola.eu/   <--------

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.