Is IANA fit to lead the Internet Community?

[Andy Sernovitz <andy@interactivehq.org>]

To everyone involved in the gTLD-MoU discussion:

Please note that Perry Metzger and David Crocker are the official
representatives of IANA on the iPOC.  Together they have flamed,
insulted and dismissed every criticism of the gTLD-MoU.  

Please note that they, and they alone, have veto power over every future
amendment to the gTLD-MoU.   This is established in the MoU, section 11,
which reads:  "e.No amendment to this MoU shall enter into force until
it has been signed by both the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority and
the Internet Society, and any such amendment shall enter into force on
the date that it has been so signed"

If you sign the MoU, you endorse and enable this veto power.  If the MoU
is implemented, Metzger and Crocker will have the authority to block any
proposed changes to domain name policy.

Please ask yourself the following questions:

1)  Do you feel comfortable giving these people this power?
2)  Have they demonstrated behavior that leads you to believe that they
will be open to future amendments of the MoU?  Or does their behavior to
date indicate that they will continue to dismiss and insult all critics?
3)  Has IANA shown sufficient professionalism and leadership qualities
when it appointed Metzger and Crocker to represent it on the iPOC?  Has
IANA taken responsibility for the actions of its official
representatives?
4)  Do we have confidence that IANA will chose appropriate, diplomatic
representatives in the future?
5)  Are you prepared to have future discussions of domain name policy be
dominated by continued personal insult and dismissal of all critics?
6)  Do you feel that your legitimate concerns are receiving a fair
hearing?
7)  Are you willing to endorse the authority of these individuals,
gambling that they may be more responsive to your needs after the MoU is
enacted?

Please note that all of the above statements are directed at the
professional actions of these two members of the iPOC.  As official
officeholders, their actions are legitimately open for discussion and
analysis (as with all public officials).   I am attempting to avoid any
personal attacks or criticisms.

As with all public officeholders, however, their statements on the
issues are to be taken as official statements, even if they add
"Speaking personally, and not in an official capacity"  to the end of a
message.  When a member of the iPOC send a comment on the MoU to lists
discussing the MoU, they are speaking in an official capacity -- just as
a congressman or other official can not make policy statements at a
public dinner without it being attributed to their official views.

I believe that discussing the fitness of someone to hold office is a
normal, legitimate part of the public discussion.  Especially is
circumstances, such as this, where there was no public election of the
members of iPOC, and there will be no public election of members of POC.


--  Andy 
______________________________________________________
Andy Sernovitz   ----   andy@interactivehq.org
Association for Interactive Media
1019 19th Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20036
202-408-0008 / fax:202-408-0111
http://www.interactivehq.org
Subscribe to our email newsletter:
email "subscribe" to whosnews@interactivehq.org
______________________________________________________