[Ws2-jurisdiction] FW: [CCWG-ACCT] RES: Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and Poll Results

[Nigel Roberts]

> Since you have been using this word 'disingenuous', let me tell you what
> it disingenuous. It is disingenuous to have told us at that time that
> jurisdiction should go to WS 2 becuase it was not tid to IANA
> transition, and then now, after the IANA transition, to tell us, sorry,
> we cannot do anything about jurisdiction becuase it was ans is tied to
> IANA transition. That is what is happening, and that is disingenuous.

The only think that puzzles me about this is why you thought it would be 
any different, when certain members of the community decided to 'give 
away the farm' (as far as negotiating position is concerned) in Dublin.

Change only occurs when there is bargaining power, never otherwise.

It's clear that WS2, while not entirely and purely a figleaf, is not 
going to make anything other than token changes to the ICANN that was 
created in WS1.

Some of us have seen in this all before, in 2003.

I challenge you all to manage to achieve something different this time 
round.