Just to say that I am involved in this debate through the ISOC
Switzerland Chapter, which has joined the "opposition" to this decision
together with a few other chapters, especially because of the
non-transparent way that this was made.
My opinion is that independently from the decision making process, this
is a bad development that can harm significantly the reputation of ISOC.
I am not sure if it is still possible to stop it, but I don't feel like
"building on it", at least not at this stage.
For now I would ask if the CNSIG would be willing to take actually a
position on the selling of .org to a private firm.
Btw, the Swiss chapter recently received the news that we got a Beyond
the Net Grant to run a platform (a monthly gathering in NetHood's new
space in Zurich, http://langstrasse200.ch/
) for "digital self-defense"
in collaboration with different organizations including the
pep.foundation, CCC Switzerland, the University of Zurich and more.
On 05.12.19 23:20, novaes(a)riseup.net wrote:
You're probably aware of the fact that ISOC sold .org to Ethos Capital
(I was just reading the transcript):
What seems relevant for CNSIG is that one of the arguments used to
justify the transaction was "connecting the unconnected":
"Gonzalo Camarillo: So this actually allows us to fulfill the mission,
which I think has been stated several times. It's very wide and when it
comes, for example, with connecting the unconnected, we are talking
about like 4 billion people that could be basically positively affected
with this". (p.26)
Maybe it would be opportune for the CNSIG to organize it better in order
to demand funds/programs more specifically designed to CN goals (I take
this moment to congratulate Sarantaporo!). What do you think?
Council mailing list