[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Membership] Re: [IFWP] RE: Drawing lines
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: [Membership] Re: [IFWP] RE: Drawing lines
- From: jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 16:39:49 +0000
- CC: ICANN Comments <Comments@icann.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>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, ICANN SO comments <email@example.com>, Icann Membership <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Organization: INEGroup INC.
- References: <199903181615.IAA16398@shell5.ba.best.com> <email@example.com>
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Roeland and all,
Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
At 10:31 AM 3/18/99 -0600, John B. Reynolds wrote:
We [INEGroup] Completely agree here with Roeland. And it is
>I agree with Michael Sondow. Membership criteria will be a lot
>we base it on the identity of the domain registrant rather than the
>of the Web site (if any).
Hmmm, MHSC.NET is the registrant for a number of Domain Names that aren't
necessarily commercial, yet MHSC certainly is. Almost every ISP is
position. According to your rules, this would also disqualify many
are non-commercial, yet their registration is held for them by their
My base-line argument is that there is more grey area than you might
and there are no such clear lines of demarcation.
of many reasons that providing for "Constituencies" or "SIGs",
in other words Special Interest Groups as part of the bylaws
structure of any SO, in by definition divisive and an attempt of a
type of gerrymandering.
And in fact there is not legal basis to Enforce and charters
for gTLD's or
The entire arena of these debates are littered with failed attempts
such clear lines. IMHO, this is the fundamental flaw with constituency
based representation. Were DNS gTLD charters enforced then we might
some sort of basis for argument. But, they aren't and we don't.
for that matter ccTLD's in an ever changing market based global economy.
This has been true in other industries, such as banking and the brokerage
as well as this Insurance industry, it is just as true in the Internet
as well. The blurring of the lines started to occur in the internet
some 3-4 years ago, and is not ingrained into the industry to go backwards
and re-invent the industry all over again. Not to mention it
detrimental to the stability from both and industry standpoint as well
as from a financial standpoint as well..
Roeland M.J. Meyer -
Personal web pages:
KISS ... gotta love it!
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