IP: An alternative view on -- New Internet Board Hears Plenty of Skepticism

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 22:04:51 -0500
To: farber () cis upenn edu
From: Steve Crocker <crocker () mbl edu>

Well, I was there too.  My take on things was a bit different:

There were indeed a number of people who expressed distrust of the board.
They were vocal and persistent, but I don't think it's accurate to suggest
they were the majority.  There were also a substantial number of people
there who assume the ICANN will operate reasonably and that the interim
board is earnest, hard-working and fairly reasonable.

There was considerable teeth-gnashing over how the interim board was chosen
and whether they are representative of the various geographic and
demographic constituencies.  For the long haul, I think that's a fair issue
to deal with.  In the immediate future, I think ICANN's most important task
is become operational and take care of business.  Trust will come if they
are effective and responsible.

The Berkman Center for Internet & Society provided support for the meeting
-- registration, briefing books, real-time network postings, etc.  I was
pretty impressed with the quality of the result, particularly since it was
put together fairly quickly.  This ain't easy.  The Berkman professionals,
particularly Jonathan Zittrain and Molly Shaffer Van Houweling, did a great
job of moderating.  They moved the meeting forward, organized the issues in
real time, kept a light touch and added value.

A number of people wanted to hear the board's views and plans.  Esther
Dyson, the interim board chair, and Mike Roberts, the interim CEO, made it
clear at the outset that the purpose of the meeting was for the board to
hear from the public and that ICANN had not yet formulated specific plans
and views.  This was a sticking point for some of the attendees who wanted
to hear more concrete plans and have an opportunity criticize or shape
those plans.  I found it interesting that there seemed to be an equal equal
number who felt the ICANN was moving too fast and counseled delay.  This
meeting clearly didn't satisfy either of those groups.  The meeting did,
however, provide a forum for people to express their views to the board and
for the public to see the board members and hear a little about their
background.  It's evident to me that some of the board members have put a
lot of time and energy into ICANN already, while others probably have not.

The ICANN is just getting started.  I think they're making a strong effort
to be accessible, attentive and open.  It's my understanding the board will
have similar meetings in Europe and Asia and perhaps elsewhere.

As I said above, my view is that the ICANN needs to get into operation and
take care of business on a daily basis.  The community can then judge how
well the ICANN serves its needs.  ICANN also needs to set up a longer term
technical agenda and all of the machinery for membership, accountability,
etc., etc.  I think all this is completely obvious to everyone involved and
I fully expect to see reasonable things emerge from the process.

For the record, I have no role in any of this, have not been embroiled in
any of the competing efforts prior to this, and have no financial or
structural ties to any of the stakeholders.  (Well, I suppose I need to
acknowledge that Dave Crocker is my brother, but his views are his and mine
are mine, i.e. my brother is not my keeper, nor am I his.)


Steve