The changes ICANN seems to be making these days worry me, mostly because I don't see a clear explanation of the reasoning behind their recent moves. When I got

The changes ICANN seems to be making these days worry me, mostly because I don't see a clear explanation of the reasoning behind their recent moves. When I got the email from namecheap, I did use their template, but I immediately assumed it would be tossed into /dev/null. If you aren't aware, ICANN has recently been pushing to remove themselves from their US contract, supposedly at the behest of other countries who don't like the idea of US governance of the system. My problem though is that I don't see any clear explanation of why this is actually needed, and I see plenty of reasons why keeping it under US oversight is a good thing. For example, has ICANN formed an independent outside auditor or oversight body to replace the functions the US has traditionally performed? Good luck wading through their website to figure that out. I've even heard ICANN members say that it's merely "symbolic", so that other countries will trust ICANN more. That doesn't make sense though, when there are some quantifiable differences in operation and oversight under the new governance model. From PcWorld http://www.pcworld.com/article/2142460/us-ntias-plan-to-end-icann-contract-puts-internet-freedom-at-risk-critics-say.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/2142460/us-ntias-plan-to-end-... "Without the NTIA contract, there’s no limit on ICANN’s ability to raise fees on its domain-name system services, added Daniel Castro, senior analyst at the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a tech-focused think tank. “Without U.S. oversight, ICANN has the potential to grow into the world’s largest unregulated monopoly,” he said. “We should be very mindful of creating a global organization with little accountability that can effectively tax the Internet.” The participants in ICANN would not allow the organization to become an unregulated monopoly, Strickling countered. That view “totally disregards the presence of hundreds of stakeholders, thousands of stakeholders, who actually set the policies for ICANN,” he said. “If you’re saying [the groups involved] are all going to allow that to happen, then you’re basically saying you don’t believe in the multistakeholder model.”" Links for the curious: ICANN Resources Page: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/agreements-en https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/agreements-en ICANN contract: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-contract-14aug06-en.pdf https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-contract-14... ICANN Board: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/board-of-directors-2014-03-19-en https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/board-of-directors-201... If anyone has a good explanation of what they mean, in detail, by "global multistakeholder community", and how those "stakeholders" will actually be able to influence ICANN, I would really like to see it.