[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Comment-Dnso] Re: [IFWP] Re: Perplexed in the Face of Anger, Acrimony & ~Evidence
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: [Comment-Dnso] Re: [IFWP] Re: Perplexed in the Face of Anger, Acrimony & ~Evidence
- From: Jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 07:22:13 +0100
- CC: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, ICANN DNSO List <email@example.com>, DNSO <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "DNSO.association.org" <email@example.com>
- Organization: INEG. Inc.
- References: <m10pWqM-000XxuC@ns1.vrx.net>
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Richard and all,
Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> At 01:26 AM 6/3/99 +0200, Onno Hovers wrote:
> >In article <email@example.com> you wrote:
> >>At 02:37 PM 6/2/99 -0500, Kevin M. Kelly wrote:
> >>>Be assured that you are not alone. I must admit that (a few steps behind
> >>>ICANN) I find it increasingly difficult to see credible representation for
> >>>the non-commercial domain holders.
> >> As nearly as I can tell, the stance being taken by some folks is that ICANN
> >> should, somehow, provide a position for non-commercial holders, without
> >> there being any credible group to occupy the space.
> >> Where is the credible group that represents non-commercial domain holders?
> >Do you feel that the ISOC proposal and the group that supported it is
> >not 'a credible group that represents non-commercial domain holders'?
> >If so, why?
> Because it appears to be Don acting unilaterally, and few people trust him.
> The reason I think he appears to be acting unilaterally is, when the
> meetings were taking place to try to work out a compromise I asked him
> why he didn't agree to the compromise proposal, and he told me his
> constituents wouldnt agree to it. I pointed out he hadn't asked them.
Yep, and this is in the Berlin minuets archived as I pointed out before, but
will provide yet again for people to review for themselves:
This also supports MIchael Sondow's comments and post from David
Mahear behind the scenes move in conjunction seemingly with
Don Heath. All of course without consulting with the ISOC membership.
An is is also interesting to point out, as Richard eluded to here that
Don Heath stated the the ISOC membership would never go along with
the compromise. This he did in Berlin, and on it's face, is a false
statement as hd did not know that that would be true. Given that comment
in Berlin, and the known minuets, and the several incidents of a similar nature
the Don Heath has been involved in in the past, such as the Jim Dixon
affair, it is reasonable to assume that Don Heaths creditability is nearly
> So, he's acting on their behalf without consultation. I'd bet dollars
> to donuts that if you really asked those organizations if they thought
> McDonalds trademark attorney was the best guy to represent non-commercial
> entities they'd say no, but of course nobody has aksed them, but Don
> was dead set against getting him in there.
> This smells fishy.
Agreed. Sure does. And where you have that smell, it is likely that there
are some stinky fish near by.
> firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com
> Remember, amateurs built the Ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208