13 ms·

> Since then it has been run by lawyers in complete secrecy It seems that HN wants to help them with that. There isn't a single name in this entire thread. Wh

> Since then it has been run by lawyers in complete secrecy It seems that HN wants to help them with that. There isn't a single name in this entire thread. Why aren't we talking about the board members here? Why aren't we using their real names so that they can be personally held responsible for their decisions?

renewiltord 7y ago
https://www.internetsociety.org/board-of-trustees/ https://www.internetsociety.org/board-of-trustees/ Andrew Sullivan is the guy you want, though. He's the one pushing this deal.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rndgermandude 7y ago
  Every single board member has to go. Every single one of them. At this point, it would be easier to just transfer over all the assets incl the PIR to an organization that is more worthy of our trust, such as the EFF. > It was for this reason that the board voted unanimously to approve the deal (aside from one trustee who is recused from PIR matters). https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2019/12/the-sale-of-pir-the-internet-society-board-perspective/ https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2019/12/the-sale-of-pir...
  - phyzome 7y ago
    Some surprising names on that list. Mike Godwin?
    - ohashi 7y ago
      Complete sellout and a dick.
    - maxwell 7y ago
      http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_truly_savedotorg http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_tr...
  - drdec 7y ago
    > At this point, it would be easier to just transfer over all the assets incl the PIR to an organization that is more worthy of our trust, such as the EFF. That would certainly work in the short term. In the long term however, wouldn't the EFF become a magnet for the types of people currently populating the ICANN board? They see that there is an opportunity there. So I worry that the long term effect would be to ruin the EFF as it is slowly overrun by opportunist that do not care about the core mission. Not sure what a good long term solution is however.
    - rndgermandude 7y ago
      It would become a magnet. However, given the broader membership base and their history, I think it would be harder to take over something like the EFF or e.g. the mozilla Foundation (and before you yell "browser maker, conflict of interest" at me, I have a .dev domain to sell to you...). The ISOC, while they proudly proclaim 67K members, is an organization with largely silent/inactive members (aside from lobbyists), most of whom probably forgot by now that they are members at all - or at least that's what it seems to be from my perspective. The EFF (or even mozilla) on the other hand have more active members, and it would be harder to do a (slow-moving) hostile takeover. Of course, everything can be undermined and taken over, as the ISOC shows. However, the ISOC seems "burned" at this point where it would be extremely hard to rebuild and recover, while the EFF e.g. is still functional and it would be easier to keep it from deteriorating in the first place than trying to undo damage already done.
      - jaywalk 7y ago
        >and before you yell "browser maker, conflict of interest" at me, I have a .dev domain to sell to you... I was about to start ranting about Google, but it appears that they are now allowing public .dev registrations through registrars. I don't know when that changed.
    - renewiltord 7y ago
      That’s why it needs to be the CCOR. It’s a cooperative which is perfect.
- ohashi 7y ago
  Vint Cerf. Mike Godwin. Throw their names in too. They pushed for this deal. You can read Mike's shitty argument for how selling it off would be the 'real way' to save dot org. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_truly_savedotorg/ http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_tr... It's a poorly reasoned piece where he won't even accept basic facts when called out on them.
- mjayhn 7y ago
  This guy went from being the CEO of an underwear company (that I love) to an ICANN board member in 2018, interesting.

renewiltord 7y ago

https://www.internetsociety.org/board-of-trustees/ https://www.internetsociety.org/board-of-trustees/ Andrew Sullivan is the guy you want, though. He's the one pushing this deal.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
rndgermandude 7y ago
Every single board member has to go. Every single one of them. At this point, it would be easier to just transfer over all the assets incl the PIR to an organization that is more worthy of our trust, such as the EFF. > It was for this reason that the board voted unanimously to approve the deal (aside from one trustee who is recused from PIR matters). https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2019/12/the-sale-of-pir-the-internet-society-board-perspective/ https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2019/12/the-sale-of-pir...
- phyzome 7y ago
  Some surprising names on that list. Mike Godwin?
  - ohashi 7y ago
    Complete sellout and a dick.
  - maxwell 7y ago
    http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_truly_savedotorg http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_tr...
- drdec 7y ago
  > At this point, it would be easier to just transfer over all the assets incl the PIR to an organization that is more worthy of our trust, such as the EFF. That would certainly work in the short term. In the long term however, wouldn't the EFF become a magnet for the types of people currently populating the ICANN board? They see that there is an opportunity there. So I worry that the long term effect would be to ruin the EFF as it is slowly overrun by opportunist that do not care about the core mission. Not sure what a good long term solution is however.
  - rndgermandude 7y ago
    It would become a magnet. However, given the broader membership base and their history, I think it would be harder to take over something like the EFF or e.g. the mozilla Foundation (and before you yell "browser maker, conflict of interest" at me, I have a .dev domain to sell to you...). The ISOC, while they proudly proclaim 67K members, is an organization with largely silent/inactive members (aside from lobbyists), most of whom probably forgot by now that they are members at all - or at least that's what it seems to be from my perspective. The EFF (or even mozilla) on the other hand have more active members, and it would be harder to do a (slow-moving) hostile takeover. Of course, everything can be undermined and taken over, as the ISOC shows. However, the ISOC seems "burned" at this point where it would be extremely hard to rebuild and recover, while the EFF e.g. is still functional and it would be easier to keep it from deteriorating in the first place than trying to undo damage already done.
    - jaywalk 7y ago
      >and before you yell "browser maker, conflict of interest" at me, I have a .dev domain to sell to you... I was about to start ranting about Google, but it appears that they are now allowing public .dev registrations through registrars. I don't know when that changed.
  - renewiltord 7y ago
    That’s why it needs to be the CCOR. It’s a cooperative which is perfect.
ohashi 7y ago
Vint Cerf. Mike Godwin. Throw their names in too. They pushed for this deal. You can read Mike's shitty argument for how selling it off would be the 'real way' to save dot org. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_truly_savedotorg/ http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200114_here_is_how_we_can_tr... It's a poorly reasoned piece where he won't even accept basic facts when called out on them.
mjayhn 7y ago
This guy went from being the CEO of an underwear company (that I love) to an ICANN board member in 2018, interesting.