[discuss] What is MSism?

Wed Mar 26 18:36:02 UTC 2014

At 18:17 26/03/2014, John Curran wrote
>JFC -
>     Lack of response does not indicate "general agreement" nor "no 
> one opposed";
>    it simply indicates "lack of response".   To refer to it 
> otherwise is disingenuous.

Pretty obvious. But it obliges people to explain what they pretend to 
knowingly discuss.

>    However, I do have some good news, in that I will respond to 
> your proposed
>    MS definition (i.e. "It is to polycracy the equivalent of 
> monarchy to democracy.
>    Technically, MS proceeds from a root/server/client hierarchic 
> model") and note
>    that I believe it to be contrary to existing usage of the term 
> and otherwise without
>    merit.

You can believe what you want as long as you document it. Every creed 
welcome: this is a HR.

>  (The good news being that now you _can_ summarize your responses
>    received, the result being "overwhelmingly opposed"...)

Up to now this is (surprisingly) inexact. But I know, MSism would 
ceased to be a magic trick if it was investigated.

Now, when a camailla invades an open public space it is not 
surprising that the real world majority is not welcome :-) May I 
remember you that we are discussing a matter where the world majority 
in Dubai has opposed your vision. Also that our minority has 
aggregated by loyalty around the now retiring NTIA, which has found a 
better strategy. One can therefore consider that the transfer to 
ICANN is its sacrifice to this new strategy. The USG has measured 
where was its best interest, and plays it very well. They let you drop.

The problem is to know how one can reasonably reach a balanced 
transition. You do not help it in sticking to positions that the NTIA 
abandons to ICANN  (with glorious words, I acknowledge it). You do 
not help in refusing (by despite? or unbelief of the change) that we 
reach out to you.

>    In keeping with the George's proposed etiquette or the 1net 
> discuss list, I shall
>    make the observation that our views are quite divergent, likely 
> irreconcilable,

Correct, from your rigid point of view, at this time.

Totally uncorrect from mine. You are part of  a VGNIC structure. The 
largest one so far. But the time for VGNICs fair competition has 
come. Introducing competition does not means killing the incumbent. 
However it means for the incumbent not to block the new commers. 
Otherwise it will be sued (best) or opposed and will lose. I fully 
understand this is new to you, and it is difficult to accept (while 
it seems so unlikely) and adapt. You feel you are still the big one: 
this is true, but the NTIA has accepted that you are not the only one 
anymore. And the spirit of the law, and probably the jurisprudence, 
and the law once the Congress has understood the opportunity, is 
against your position.

This deregulating datacommunications. Not my decision: the ITU vote 
for an increased regulation and the USG cute reponse.

>    and thus my constructive suggestion is that you find a mailing 
> list of those of
>    similar beliefs, and refine your ideas in that forum (I've 
> included the cc's on this
>    reply to aid in that process, but ask that you refrain from 
> cross posting in the
>    future, and simply use one forum of like-minded folks to 
> continue your efforts.)

I thought you would be more MSist. The attempted trick is 
understandable, but is poor.

We have an open mailing list established by the inculbent to convene 
a debate on MS-IG. We are two stakeholders. You for ARIN, depending 
on ICANN, me for VGNICs depending on IUsers. And all what you can 
tell me amount to say: "please I cannot resist, Dubai, Snowden, VGNs, 
the NTIA retirement, and now Marco Civil by our co-host, what next? 
Please leave me die in peace...".  I will only do it by force for the 
whole world to see.

We do not want you to die. We want you to behave as what you claim 
you are: a stakeholder. Not a monopoly component anymore, but a 
stand-alone stakeholder in our common enhanced cooperation. We just 
want you to adapt to the new reality of the legal rather than 
political US leadership strategy attempted by the NTIA.

As loyal US allies, we are ready to help, but our priroities is to 
our nations, people and ourselves. If you do not want us, you will 
end irritating us! And we will be many, many more than you. With 
everyone his HomeRoot and SuperIANA.

Cheers.

jfc

Cheers !
jfc