Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
The Internet

ICANN Board Election 33

Purdyman writes: " has a David Corn opinion piece about the upcoming ICANN board member election. He more or less says that 1) it's important and 2) it could be structured better. So, how important is it? What happens if the ICANN board (or at least the at-large portion) becomes corporate-dominated? How about consumer-dominated? Also, how should the election be structured? For example, the method of nominating candidates seems like it could be abused fairly easily if desired; how would you fix it?" This isn't the first time we've heard about these elections.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ICANN Board Election

Comments Filter:
  • Well, I think that "more important than the federal election of the united states" is a bit of an exaggeration, and I'm in Canada, where it shouldn't even affect me directly anyways. Well, normally the federal election is really significant. Only recently has it become the coke/pepsi two-sides-of-the-same-corporate-cocksucking situation. But still, I think the US government could siglehandedly dismantle the internet if they really put their minds to it, and that's the worst ICANN can do.

    Still, there's no denying that this ICANN thing is damn important. In that vein, where can I get some info on the candidates? I'd hate to be uninformed on this.
  • <I>Just use IP number and be done with it.</I>
    I wonder if you're going to still be saying that when IPv6 becomes the standard.
    Nice and easy to remember, write down and repeat.
  • Point is I won't have to its a click on page or a icon somewhere etc. I have been waiting/praying for ipv6 for a long time. If only just to watch some one mark down on their bottom line a loss of millions when their ".com" is now worth 0.00 .
    As to the Authoring/creating problems use cut and paste and get over it. [/:-)
  • by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @08:03PM (#963274) Homepage Journal
    Okay, perhaps this is not the perfect solution... however at present it presents the only vaguely-workable solution to the domain name disaster we are experiencing. A lot of people on this site have voiced some very strong opinions and some very viable ideas on solutions. ICANN is sure as hell not lurking /. to come up with policy... so take your ideas and opinions to the source. The worst that can happen is that they are ignored. If you don't sign up, you're gauranteed that your ideas/opinions will be ignored. Most notably, I expect that the people who had good ideas about tlds to sign up. In case you have forgotten who you are, here's the list:
    Colin Smith
    Mr Z

    Additionally, there are several folks who have voiced very strong and (sometimes) very well reasoned opinions about domain name administration. I would like to remind said folks again that, while we enjoy your input here, it has zero chance of making an impact on reality if stays on slashdot. If said people need to be reminded of their identities, they are:
    Duane Dibbley
    chrome koran
    Garry Anderson

    Lastly, remember that since ICANN is not inviting you specifically to join, a vote of abstention (by not joining) will go unheard.... and if anyone has a better, workable solution, speak it.

  • Actually you are sort of right, but the issue will become the transaction overhead as more of those boxes south of line the start asking for high packet counts(streaming etc).
    Yes the overhead is small but you will wish you could bypass right to the target box via switches not software. If not now soon.
    Yes IWG is a bit nutty, but look at what we are posting about, Ironic.
  • After you sign up for for the @large membership, you should receive an confirmation e-mail. However , the letter with my PIN arrived four weeks later.

    The best advice I can give you is to be patient and don't hold your breath.
  • perhaps a newer, better, system will come around (maybe SUN/Java-style package naming:, or

    Actually, that first example would be The second example is correct.

    The reason I bring this up is to point out that the Java package naming scheme is actually an inverted domain name (appended with whatever the owner of that domain sees fit).

    It seems unlikely that such a change in the naming of domains would do much good. :-)

  • by ocelotbob ( 173602 ) <> on Saturday July 01, 2000 @08:06PM (#963278) Homepage
    This whole Bull$hit over who controls domain names is getting out of hand. There are companies out there, Proctor and Gamble being the worst offender, that register hundreds, even thousands of domain names such that they can make money selling their product. Then, they do the same thing over every imaginable domain. Now, it's not to late to fix it, but we've got to act soon in order to keep things from getting even more crazy.

    The way I see it, the following needs to be done:

    • Have as many tech people join the ICANN @ Large program. The only way to change things is to vote, and to vote your conscience.
    • Have profiles of people running for the board. What are their stands on domainjacking, multiple registrations, etc? What is their internet experience? These are rather important questions.
    • Change the domain name system. Either go to the older UK style of TLD, SLD, Subdomain, add more domains, make it so the person who registers not able to register, or make one entity, corporate or individual only able to have a certain amount of domains per TLD.
    Fortunately, the DNS system is not irreperable yet, but if we don't act soon, twenty yearrs from now we could be sitting around asking "Remember the Internet?" while munching on our soylent green.
  • I've been a member-at-large of ICANN for approx. 4 months, and the only information I've recieved from them was that someone had introduced an amendment that allowed someone to nominate themselves. Other than that I've seen better run goat ropings.
  • The article gets two facts wrong:

    1. The US government remains in charge of the DNS. ICANN is just its agent, by contract. The contracts expire in a few months, but are renewable. The US government can under the current contracts take back all power and terminate ICANN's authority. The government wishes to downpeadal this, both to avoid being held responsible for ICANN and to lessen attention to the issue of renewing or even expanding ICANN's role this fall.
    2. It is not correct that "Nine of its board members are chosen by organizations that run the technical side of the Internet." Even if one accepted this fits the PSO, and the ASO, it cannot by any analysis fit the DNSO - which is the business constituency, and has NO technical element AT ALL.
    Please visit []
    A. Michael Froomkin [mailto],
    U. Miami School of Law,POB 248087
    Coral Gables, FL 33124,USA
  • Blockquoth the poster:
    The best advice I can give you is to be patient and don't hold your breath.
    Actually, now is the time to start hunting down what happened. Events are beginning to move, and the @Large group said everyone should have received at least an email confirmation. Try contacting them at [mailto] or visit the site at [].
  • I got the confirmation email May 31, and the postman came last week. I agree with gilroy [], if you have waited over a month, start checking at ICANN's members [] page. Hope that they didn't 'forget' you.

    Louis Wu

    Thinking is one of hardest types of work.

  • Remember that this is only the first incarnation of the Internet on a large scale, and any first incarnation is bound to have childhood diseases. The current Internet's is domain name structuring and registration. They should switch to a strict structuring. No more .com, .org, .gov, .be, .to, .cx, but strictly,,,, Restructuring from scratch now will simply be impossible. Lets wait for IPv6 and Internet2, and make the best of what we have now.

    the Gods have a sense of humour,
  • There once was a man with a parrot
    That he received in a trade for a ferret
    The man said, "I'm so lonely
    I'm terribly homely..
    So please won't you sit on my *carrot*?"

  • Wow, that's a completely brilliant idea! Just keep that in mind the next time you move your machine to a different subnet.

  • Excellent points. No matter what we all think of ICANN, it will play a role in the Internet's future. Everyone should go and sign up for "At-Large" membership. I've done it and I plan on self-nominating myself to run for the board. I want to make sure the board isn't all corporate influenced. . .

  • Speak for yourself. Personally I do care. Especially on one topic. See also [] or its FreeBSD and CATV driven original at [].

    And so should anyone else who either has a domain or hopes to get one eventually. Someone has to stand up and defend the inalienable right that every dog has to his, her or its own domain (e.g. []).

    And that is just one of the issues that ICANN deals with.

    Ah well, as usual the damnations people give is inversely proportional to the import of the matter. Until it's too late, of course.

  • I prefer Coca-Cola as well (I'm even a shareholder), but this post's parent is the most absurd thing I've read on Slashdot yet.

    Thank you.

  • Yes I have... and I live in Argentina.
  • I signed up for the member-at-large position, but I don't belive that I've ever gotten a conformation-slip. Have other people actualy gotten them?
  • Actually, that first example would be The second example is correct.

    The reason I bring this up is to point out that the Java package naming scheme is actually an inverted domain name (appended with whatever the owner of that domain sees fit).

    It seems unlikely that such a change in the naming of domains would do much good. :-)

    Oh...right. Oops. I think my way makes more sense, though.

    I may be kinda biased (it is my idea, though undoubtedly thought up before), but I think it'd work. For instance, would contain only software companies. Microsoft would have:,, and another for research (EDU? SCI?). And no registering multiple domain names for the same business; it's just gratuitous.

    I'll be damned if that made any sense.

    Mike "Forgot His Signature" Greenberg
  • the more stay away the more it will
    be made clear that ICANN is a masquerade
    by big business to deprive everybody else of their rights. []

  • Corn is certainly right that this issue deserves more attention. Such matters are not as sexy as some, (not entirely by accident: both Scott Adams and P.J. O'Rourke have pointed out that politics is made boring to facilitate insder control) but potentially important. Though I am not convinced that ICANN is going to be capable of doing all that much good OR harm. My guess is that like all other governing bodies it will be playing catch-up. Am I too optimistic? Or does this count as pessimism?
  • Though I am not convinced that ICANN is going to be capable of doing all that much good OR harm.

    Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive... Don't think for one moment that ICANN doesn't (or at least won't in the near future) have every bit as much power as the President of the United States of America... but on a global scale.

    When ICANN is the Supreme Authority of the Internet, and they fsck something up, who can anyone else turn to? Like Micro$oft (in some areas), they're the only game in town... if you don't like it, too damn bad.

    Unfortunately, what they say goes... and they have the final say on everything as far as the Internet is concerned.

    And that's a whole hell of a lot of power to wield. Call me nuts, but maybe one organization shouldn't hold all that power alone?

  • Face it: with the entirety of Europe spitting in ICANN's face, it seems to have a rather limited lifetime. The Internet, once regarded as a transcendant, borderless entity (regardless of actual physical limitations and boundaries) ungovernable by any single nation, will be a hell of a lot better. ICANN...well, it can't; it's a joke.

    On a slightly related topic, the entire domain-name industry is in extreme disarray, possibly irreversibly. Reorganization is too difficult; it's too late...perhaps a newer, better, system will come around (maybe SUN/Java-style package naming:, or that will fix things in that respect, but I doubt it.

  • This important... but, isn't every government election important as well?? Who will sit on the Internet's Senate Oversight Committee. Will they be soft-money whores? Will they be corporates junkies or bleeding heart liberals? Will they wear boxers or briefs?
  • I'm not sure either whether it counts as optimism or pessimism. Look at how much wall street has fallen in love with the phrase "dot com". ICANN's role in the future could actually matter a lot. They could do a great deal of good, evil, or nothing. My guess is evil, unless we get some really great people on the board. That's why it bugs me that, as the article points out, there's no big education campaign to see who the candidates are and where they stand. How about a temporary, special section of Slashdot, with weekly interviews of the top 20 or 30 candidates? I bet someone with server space and bandwidth out there is just dying to download Slashcode and set this up. (Yeah, I'm karma whoring. But I legitimately think it might work!)
  • This [] is an excellent article highlighting the tremendous responsibilities that ICANN now has on its shoulders.

    At the very least, ICANN will be implementing an online voting system [] for the ICANN At Large [] members, which should help speed things up. Considering some of their deadlines are as soon as September (yes, 2000), I certainly hope they don't fsck things up by dropping the ball.

    Considering how dependent the world now is on the Internet, I think a crisis could occur on a global scale if ICANN doesn't live up to the world's expectations.

    (Can anyone say revolution?)

  • This could be one of the most important net developments in the last few years. Whether net users want to admit it or not, ICANN has sweeping powers that could make life a lot more complicated and annoying for us. It's easy for people to spout off the "Oh! It's all about big business and it's a sham..." but it DOES have a mandate and control. This is not an issue to be taken lightly. EVERY SINGLE /. MEMBER needs to sign up for the At-Large [] program and make their voices heard. Big business ultimately won't bite the hand the makes it profitable -- the individual users.
  • It concerns me greatly that what was once a benevolent dictatorship under the brilliant and wise Dr. Jon Postel, is now a beurocratic quasi-democracy of 16 year olds without any understanding of deeply technical issues. Or worse, companies with everything but the interests of the whole in mind. Is there even the remotest possibility this is a good thing?

    Ignoring the profoundly trivial issues like if we should add .sex or .web to the Network Solutions monopoly first, forcing everyone to pay up or get squatted. Do we want "Internet users" making important decisions based on who kisses the most babies or has a cuter butt, rather then solid scientific research and debate? Will we soon have an ICANN president sneaking around with interns and running IP-block deals with crooked loans?

    I better shut up before my domains start turning up "lost" yet again and get auctioned off.

  • I don't know that I stated it a little strongly (NOT TRYING TO START A FLAME WAR HERE). I agree, it's not dire or anything -- yet. However I'm just concerned that if people don't take an interest now before inertia of the organization really takes off, we're going to have a big mess to clean up 5 years down the road. Who would have thought that the InterNIC of yester-year would turn into Network Solutions and all the associated problems we have today with domain registration? It's the same problem I see with American government today -- people write it off as "politics" and don't want to get involved, but that's the same attitude that got us stuck where we are today.
  • Just waiting for this whole insane idea of "plain text domains" to go the way of Phone System.

    Links are so encapsulated now so what is the point of plain text? It aint gonna bring "Brand Awarness" if its hidden in the damn HREF. Just use IP number and be done with it.

    Dinos of the New Age Roar, Sour Geek Yawns!
  • PacketMaster states the case a little too strongly, but there is no reason why every /.er shouldn't register to participate in how the internet will be run.

    Currently, ICANN is thinking about adding new genetic TLDs (in addition to .com, maybe add .web, .xxx, etc.). ICANN is also trying to figure out how to elect at-large members. Although the article doesn't state it, the most onerous of the proposed rules is a 10% requirement for putting a person on the ballot. Almost every public comment states that 10% is too high. The current board meets in mid-July. We'll see what happens.

    So join and participate in how the internet is going to look like in the future. My feeling is that addresses like will eventually fall by the wayside, and we will need to access web sites by more conventional information (name of company, country, product, etc.). This would like some combination of the post office and the yellow pages.

Q: How many IBM CPU's does it take to execute a job? A: Four; three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off.