<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ga] DNSO Review
Uh ... this means that ICANN considers DNSO irrelevant?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Higgs [mailto:simon@higgs.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 9:53 AM
> To: roberto.gaetano@voila.fr
> Cc: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] DNSO Review
> Importance: High
>
>
> At 05:40 PM 9/15/00 +0200, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>
> >Conclusion
> >----------
> >
> >There seem to be consensus for a WG to start, addressing at least the
> >point of creating a Constituency for individuals.
> >Other points raised are more controversial, and should be
> addressed by
> >the Working Group.
>
> Start a Working Group? To spend time on more useless, time-wasting,
> non-productive administration issues? To be once again
> ignored by the Names
> Council?
>
> Create the individuals constituency and be done with it.
>
> ICANN are calling for TLD applications - a function that the DNSO was
> created to "specialize in" - and the DNSO have no role at all in that.
>
> What's wrong with this picture?
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Simon
>
> --
> Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
>
> --
> 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
>
--
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|