Re: Re[4]: [ga] Individual domain name holders and the DNSO

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:32:57PM -0700, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
[...]
> > If the IDNO cannot be a constituency, than it does not have to worry
> > about any such "burden."
> 
> Then it wasn't relevent. My point was that no other constituency has
> this burden,

You are in error.

*Every* other constituency had the burden, and met it to a degree
several orders of magnitude greater than IDNO.  The IPC constituency,
for example, met that burden by demonstrating that it had the backing of
the large international IP organizations, representing a combined
membership of thousands and thousands of IP professionals.  The Business
constituency had the backing of such organizations as the International
Chambers of Commerce; Information Technology Association of Canada;
Japan Information Service Industry Association; Motion Picture
Association; Microsoft; Oracle; Disney.  The Non-commercial constituency
has the backing of ISOC (7000 members); ACM (80000) members; the
American Library Association, etc.  The ccTLD constituency has all 242
ccTLDs; the registrars constituency has most of the accredited 
registars. 

> yet Roberto implies that the individual domain names
> holders constituency, whatever that is, should accept a burden that no
> one else has to carry. This is simply unfair.

It would be unfair if there were a shred of truth to what you say.  But 
there isn't.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
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