Re: [ga] Harald's comment discussed on the EU list

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Roeland and all remaining DNSO assembly members,

  Well said ROeland, well said indeed!  More plain talk is
healthy for the DNSO and indeed even more so for ICANN.
Yet we see precious little of it.  In fact, when plain talk is used
on these mailing lists, there is always someone that has a
problem with anyone being so bold or remarks negitively as
to the "Tone" of the discourse/post.  I personally find this
rather amusing and yet tragic at the same time.  Life is
not all "politically Correct Speak".  In fact very little in
human communications is....

  Indeed the IDNO has earned it's bones!  Yet again as you so
correctly pointed out Roeland, the events as to the IDNO's
petition for becoming a constituency has become a sticking point
for some within the DNSO GA and most especially within the
DNSO NC....

Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:

> > From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc2@dcrocker.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2000 9:06 PM
> >
> > At 01:45 PM 9/11/00 +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> > >We deserve at least an answer stating why our petition has
> > been stonewalled
> >
> > such constructive presumptions and language have, no doubt,
> > contributed greatly to IDNO's success.
>
> More of the usual from D'Crock. Joop is right, when Individual
> Constituency was placed in abeyance, in Berlin, Santiago never answered
> the question about the delay. Since the IDNO seemed in disarray by the
> time of LA and still not together by Yokohama, the question seemed moot.
> Rather, ICANN would have it appear that way. However, if they won't
> allow the IDNO, why don't they create their own version?
>
> The longer that ICANN remains silent on this issue, the more certain it
> becomes that ICANN doesn't want recognition of individual domain name
> owners. The way things are shaping up, they don't want smallish corps
> either, as the commercial constituency clearly doesn't represent smaller
> members (they need not apply) and even if you are running a registry,
> you can't join there unless your name is NSI. Oh yes, if you are not one
> of the Big8 ISPs, you might as well forget that one. Oh yes, anyone that
> wants to sign the registrar agreement can join the registrars, as long
> as CORE will let them (and they pay the entry fee).
>
> Individual domain name holders deserve a fair answer, if ICANN wants to
> claim the consensus that they are claiming. It is a false claim unless
> individuals are a visible part of the power structure.
>
> Over two years ago, Dec98, I put forward the proposition that the ICANN
> saw, in the Paris DNSO draft, the perfect means to divide the ICANN
> opposition (lead by the BWG and ORSC, at that time). They removed the
> fluidity of that constituency model and created a series of
> non-communicating buckets. Tell me that is not what we have today,
> please. Pardon me while I chuckle through your explanation.
>
> As regards the IDNO, there is a charter up for ratifacation which I
> think is pretty good. At least, it's good enough. No, it isn't perfect,
> but I can live with it. This is one step beyond what any other
> constituency has completed. Yes, there has been a lot of internal
> flame-war, also a step beyond what most constituencies has gone through.
> Personally, I think that builds character, on the theory of "that which
> does not kill ..." Has it splintered? Not, quite. Has it fractured? Most
> certainly. Is it dead? Definitely not. Is there a competing
> organization? Look around and you tell me. Has the CA/IDNO learned some
> collective lessons? Maybe, only time will tell (personally, I think it
> has). Sometimes, building an organization is messy, so is human
> birth...that's life...get over it.
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html