[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IFWP] Re: [bwg-n-friends] Re: Bay Area meeting with Esther
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: [bwg-n-friends] Re: Bay Area meeting with Esther
- From: jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 06:23:38 +0000
- CC: email@example.com, ICann Guidelines <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>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Domain policy <DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET>
- Organization: INEGroup INC.
- References: <XFMail.email@example.com>
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
WIlliam and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> > > No, not well known for that at all Jeff. I have never done anything you
> > > mention in this paragraph. You on the other hand............
> > Hummmmm? That is not what your fromer employer stated clerly
> > William... Shall I repost that little piece of info again???
> Jeff, you know perfectly well I was never employed by anyone you know of. Let
> me say it one more time for the record, I was NEVER an employee of TJNS or the
> .TJ registry. I was contracted by the administrative contact for the domain to
> be the hostmaster, and was a partner in the company that managed the technical
> aspects of the domain.
Ok sure William. Unfortunately your former employer seems to have a different
view. I think you are protesting too much. And as such it only makes you look
> As you well know TJNS will not respond to any messages asking them anything
> other than if I am still affiliated with them.
Not true, as you well know, and I have supplied on these lists as informative
information (See archives) on more than one occasion.
> Ask for anything more detailed
> (as you have tried) and they will only reiterate that I am not affiliated with
> them, or not answer at all. (Seems they are not answering a lot of emails
> lately for some reason. I've had messages on my voice mail from a number of
> their (now former) hosting customers who have not been able to get responses
> for weeks on end.
I have received several responses form them, without a problem. It is
likely that they do not respond to you for reasons they feel very justified
in not doing so, and I can now readily see clearly as well. Your propensity
for being misleading, and disingenuous behavior would be more than ample
reason for some companies to disregard much of what you have to say
or would request. This E-Mail not withstanding.
> And Jeff is well aware that the claim they made initially of misappropriation
> fo funds was later proved to be a mistake on the part of the billing service,
> which was corrected, and totalled exactly $38.00. ]
I am aware of not such thing other than this is WIlliam Walsh's claim. It
is NOT shared with TJNS however.
> Unlike you Jeff, and unlike TJNS, I am perfectly willing to discuss the details
> of this incident publicly.
Than when why did you post to me otherwise when I first queried you in this
regard back in late December and early January? Again you are now
changing your story again William. And as such makes it difficult to
give anything you might say any creditability. This post of yours also,
> Notice I said DETAILS. TJNS is not. They are on
> one of these lists to this day, yet not once have the responded to any of the
> messages from me or anyone else about this incident. You would think that if
> there were any facts to backup the allegation you insist on repeating over and
> over, they would at least post something in support of your repeated attempts
> to use it to discredit me (since it would be in their interest to do so).
If I were them I would not post anything of this nature on any of these lists
regardless or what I may have read or may be tempted to respond to. You
have attempted to show TJNS in a bad light to me privately and to others
on this list as well. All of which is not substantiated very well and is a
obvious pattern of behavior that is both disgusting and a casting of false
aspersions, which you have attempted to do to others that do not agree with
your particular point of view, and you cannot muster up good arguments
on the content of those ideas/comments/debates.
> Further evidence of my credibility is the fact that IANA has STILL got the .TJ
> domain frozen for new registrations (this the result of the original battle
> with the Administrative Contact who wanted them TOTALLY removed from management
> as a result of their removal of me and locking me out of the servers when his
> contract was with me, and then the freeze has continued as a result of Tajik
> Telecomm filing for control after at the administrative contact's urging).
I have seen no substantive evidence of this statement. In fact the contrary,
is coming from the TJNS registry to me on two private post to me in this
regard of late.
> So Jeff, I am willing to discuss DETAILS, and specifics. When you are asked
> for them you give vague answers and claim privacy concerns, yadda yadda yadda.
I have been very specific regarding our policies on privacy issues and they
are in complete compliance with federal mandate, guidelines and California,
Delaware, and Texas state code regarding privacy of corporate information
as well as employee information. I am bound by those policies/legal
mandates, an shall remain so, as to do otherwise would be acting
outside of the law which I will NOT do for your curiosity or anyone else's.
> Who do you think is more credible? Someone willing to put the facts out on the
> table, at great personal risk I might add, or someone who won't even provide a
> corporation filing number in Deleware (something that is a matter of public
> record, the disclosure of which could not possible cause ANY harm to the
I believe that you have not put any FACTS on the table, so to speak, but
only your own rendition of what you believe to be the facts as you see them,
and snide half truths, false aspersions towards others. Hence I find this
question dubious on it's face.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Were they classmates of yours at SMU? :) sorry, Jeff, this doesn't
> > > > > fly
> > > > > here.
> > > >
> > > > No none of them are classmates of mine. Most are much older than I
> > > > am.
> > > > None are graduates of any Texas based university.
> > >
> > > But you were, right? It is such a mystery that SMU says authoritatively
> > > otherwise......
> > It is ashame that you have a poor relationship with the truth William.
> Jeff, if as you claim you do have a degree, please notify the registrars office
> that they are free to verify it.
I have three degrees, thank you very much. The certificate's hang framed
in my office. I have several other certifications, licenses, and various
awards as well. I have on three occasions verified all of my educational
background as have many others with not problem as long as they
> (Just to let you know, they confirmed that
> they do NOT keep that information secret about ANYONE.
I am not sure whom the "They" is that your refer to here. At any rate, it is
of little consequence of value what YOU might say about anyone or organization,
as it has been fairly well established that what YOU might say regarding anyone
or organization is of dubious value.
> > > with regard to you.
> > >
> > > Deja-Moo.
> > DO you as well as Ellen, have a language problem as well? How
> > awful for you!!! :(
> Jeff, I would make a comment about your grammer, but I'll let everyone else
> make their own judgements about that. Especially for someone who claims to
> have so many degrees, you would be expected to be more literate.
And, your term here, "Deja-Moo.", is a literate retort? Interesting....
> E-Mail: William X. Walsh <email@example.com>
> Date: 19-Mar-99
> Time: 22:47:35
> "We may well be on our way to a society overrun by hordes
> of lawyers, hungry as locusts."
> - Chief Justice Warren Burger, US Supreme Court, 1977
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