[CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update

[John Curran]

On Aug 14, 2016, at 10:26 AM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:
> ...
> One doesn't understand why you are so opposed to the label "governance" here.  If one goes by the definition of "Internet governance" that emerged from the WGIG ("Internet governance is the development and application of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programs that shape the evolution and use of the Internet.") then ICANN clearly engages in Internet governance.

Pradesh -

Please review my actual message - I objected to Parminder's characterization of
ICANN as a “public governance body", because the phrase “public governance”
has different connotations than ICANN’s defined purpose and mission.

>> You are not governed by your use of USB connector, but
>> benefit from the coordination which underlies same.
> 
> There is a difference between "governing" and "being governed by", which you are eliding here.

Your range of actions with respect to the connector may be contained, but that is not
the same as you being governed (as would the phrase “public governance” imply.)

> Nevertheless: There are multiple competing standards for the USB.  There is only one canonical set of domain names.  Even if you believe that ICANN only does "coordinating" (it emphatically doesn't), it's "coordination" definitely leads to my being governed by my ISP's choice to use ICANN-recognized root servers.

Incorrect - it is does not lead to _you_ “being governed” in any case; for example, ICANN
does not (as a result) obtain the legitimate use of force over your body or possessions - it
simply has policies which affect how you use the ICANN DNS community's identifier space.

> I disagree with your characterisation.  Still, I hope you'll agree with me when I note that the more monopoly and power a coordination body holds, then more it engages in a "governance" function.  (A nation-state, even a minimalist one, after all, is a "coordination body - one that sets polices and charges various fees related to national affairs", but also a governance body.)


Actually, the governance over a specific technical realm (such as DNS identifiers, a connector
format, or any other technical standards) generally exists equally and without regard to the
popularity of a given standard.   In general, you simply don’t notice because the majority tend
to operate behind the scenes in a inconspicuous manner with minimal social and political
consequence.

Thanks!
/John

Disclaimer: my views alone.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 204 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160814/dadc97cb/signature-0001.asc>