10 ms·
I suppose the question is who will do something about this. What group or individual is going to slog through the work of getting this investigated? What grou
by jml7c5 7y ago
I suppose the question is who will do something about this.
What group or individual is going to slog through the work of getting this investigated?
What group or individual is going to slog through a lawsuit?
Would the EFF take it up, or is it outside their purview?
Is there any hope of reversal/fines/prosecution? Will it hinge on intent? Does that intent exist, or was ISOC just foolish? If there was intent, can that intent be shown beyond a reasonable doubt? Or is there some rigid, incontrovertible rule that has been broken, such that intent doesn't matter?
All in all, it seems like such a stupid financial decision by ISOC (and one which goes against their mission) that one can't help but presume some sort of foul play. But who knows, perhaps they just messed up.
- shadowgovt 7y agoThe linked article pretty much lays out how this aligns with ISOC's mission---$1.1 billion, properly managed, gives ISOC the resources to pursue its mission for the foreseeable future. Probably nothing to prosecute.
- lowpro 7y agoI don't understand this point though, since on a yearly basis it will be roughly the same for them: "This funding is sufficient to provide the Internet Society with broadly equivalent annual earnings we currently receive from PIR. And through responsible, well managed investment, we believe this fund will provide a comparable level of funding to the Internet Society in perpetuity." So unless they were worried that .org was not as stable as an endowment, it seems like it didn't help them at all anyway. And this is at the cost of their core mission?
- numbsafari 7y agoWould you rather sit on a board that has to oversee an actual operation, or one that merely monitors an investment and spends lavishly on board meetings?
- toast0 7y agoI mean, there's not really that much to oversee. ISOC board just has to review payments from PIR and maybe look over an audit report once in a while. PIR has a bit more to do, since they're overseeing the contractor that's running the registry; they may need to approve some expenses and plans and what not in addition to looking at audit reports once in a while, and every three to five years choose a new auditor and solicit bids and evaluate new contractors to run the registry (and then, probably, stick with the current one).
- mattrp 7y agostart by looking at who joined ethos capital and related moves by icann to allow for removal of price caps... https://domainnamewire.com/2019/11/13/breaking-private-equity-company-acquires-org-registry/ https://domainnamewire.com/2019/11/13/breaking-private-equit...
- goatinaboat 7y agoISOC the resources to pursue its mission for the foreseeable future Can anyone link me to what the Internet Society has actually, tangibly done in this mission? Because to me they look awfully like that sort of charity that if you look closer all it does is “raise awareness” from the comfort of plush offices
- sfifs 7y agoThe US Government probably can seize control of .org if they're interested since they originally held the rights. The present administration is unlikely to be interested.
- dboreham 7y agoThe present administration is probably the catalyst for this egregious example of self dealing.
- sojmq 7y agoYou are completely right. This whole ordeal reminds us that le orange man bad fascist poop.
- mmillin 7y agoThe previous administration is actually partially responsible for this allowing to be done without government intervention. See this hacker news post [0] for some more information. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12612033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12612033
- dang 7y agoPlease don't post partisan flamebait to HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- cududa 7y agoDoubtful anyone there has a sustained interest in a domain registrar. any proof?
- Aeolun 7y agoThis would require a functional government. And the current one is nothing if not dysfunctional.
- evross 7y agoThere is https://SaveDotOrg.org https://SaveDotOrg.org which people that don't support this selling out of .org should sign. It's supported by NTEN and a lot of other site owners and internet users.
- elihu 7y agoAn alternative "do something about it" option is to just create a new name system (either based on DNS protocols, or something entirely new) that is controlled by someone more responsible. DNS is just an internet application like anything else, nothing is forcing us to use it aside from its broad adoption and lack of support for anything else in modern applications. What it comes down to is: who is both sufficiently dissatisfied with the way DNS is managed and has the clout to get a large group of organizations to move to an alternative? Or perhaps: what is the killer app that is incompatible with how ISOC runs things that would get people to switch?
- wizzwizz4 7y agoThat sounds like OpenNIC.
- calibas 7y agoThere's already some options, IPFS has IPNS.
- qes 7y ago> nothing is forcing us to use it aside from its broad adoption and lack of support for anything else in modern applications "nothing" IPv6 should give you some idea how easy your "nothing" is to change.
- iamnothere 7y agoYou can contact the IRS and the authorities in Virginia and California; if this sale is as suspicious as it appears to be, they may uncover evidence of wrongdoing and prosecute. Drew DeVault has form letters you can use: https://drewdevault.com/2019/11/29/dotorg.html https://drewdevault.com/2019/11/29/dotorg.html