ICANN chair plays chicken with internet control-halt-shift

The chair of domain name overseer ICANN has threatened to reject a key recommendation in the process to move control of the top level of internet from the US government to the non-profit organisation. In a rambling and confusing speech given toward the end of a special two-day meeting, Steve Crocker appeared to say that his …

[Will Godfrey]

The Arrogance is strong in this one.

See title.

[Destroy All Monsters]

Re: The Arrogance is strong in this one.

I dunno. How is it possible to talk like that without having been on meth for a few years?

[WatAWorld]

Wow, insisting on a change to give themselves absolute authority

"Steve Crocker appeared to say that his Board would not accept the recommendation to limit its absolute authority."

Well, the ICANN board doesn't have absolute authority now -- the US government does.

Maybe the thing is for the US government to step in and open up the process to alternative groups with better leadership.

The last thing we need is Steve Crocker becoming another Sepp Bladder or ICANN another UN Security Council.

[Pascal Monett]

At least things are official now

The Board will not accept ?

Fine then. REPLACE the Board and IMPOSE the change. End of.

It's like talking with an unreasonable child, You discuss the matter for a minute or two, to give the child a chance to comprehend. If the child still refuses after all reasons have been given, then you just MAKE him obey.

The problem here is that apparently the US Government, on this matter, is just like gutless parents who cannot abide forcing their children to do anything and must wait for them to get around to accepting things on their own. With a child it already doesn't work, and here, we're dealing with grown-up Machiavells who have a very good grasp on just how untouchable they appear to be.

What utterly fails my comprehension is why has this been allowed to go on for so long already ? Is there no one in any position of power that can do an Alexander and just cut this fracking knot already ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Another option?

How about opening the IANA contract to a competitive process that allows organizations other than ICANN to be considered? Wonder how fast ICANN would agree to accountability and governance improvements?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Another option?

But the US is afraid something like a Russian or Chinese shill will usurp the process. There ARE worse options out there than ICANN being in control...such as a rival power being in control.

[142]

Re: Another option?

I really don't understand why the US is so eager to ditch control of ICANN.

I mean I can understand why *the rest of the world* don't like them having control, but it seems like a very strategically strong role to hold - why give it up?

[WatAWorld]

Olympics and with FIFA

"While those talks proved fruitful, the key distinction over whether the internet community would be entitled to override a Board decision, or veto the organisation's budget, has been left untouched."

The question is whether the ICANN board and executive bureaucrats can turn the internet into a get-rich ultra-luxury fifedoms like was done with the Olympics and with FIFA, or whether the rest of the world gets a say in how things are run.

[Destroy All Monsters]

Fat sacks of the Roman Empire

In order to hit a critical deadline, the main details will need to be decided by the end of that particular huddle

An excellent way of proceeding is to close the door and not let them be reopened until consensus is reached.

[Pascal Monett]

And to expedite the process, make the cieling go down at 1cm/hour, and put downward spikes every 10cm2.

[Yes Me]

Key sticking point

"the key sticking point of whether the internet community would be given legal standing within the organisation."

What is this 'internet community' of which you speak?

Seriously - while I don't at all like the ICANN Board's current arrogance, I know the process by which the Board members are appointed and it's, er, an Internet community process with members coming from the various stakeholder communities. What baffles me about the single member proposal is why on earth the 'single member' would work any better than the ICANN Board, since its consensus would have to emerge from *exactly* the same stakeholder communities that currently provide the Board members.

Also note that the 'single member' community doesn't exist in the real world - it's completely imaginary at this point in time.

Colour me puzzled.