Re: [ga-ext] Re: [ga] The IC constituency building results so far [was: stuff]

["NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

Why? I see a lot of people saying it is all for Joop's personal glory. I
hear you say the IDNO has a terrible history. I hear you say it would be a
bad choice. Tell me why. I want to know. Obviously a lot of work has gone
into this. Is there another organization you think would be better? Do you
think we should form a brand new one from scratch? Again, why if much of the
work has already been done? Is the reason many want to start a new one due
to ego? Is it because your names aren't on the list of Founders?

I'm not a member of the IDNO, but you all want to shoot it down citing vague
reasons, without ever stating the actual reasons. Educate me.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
To: "Joop Teernstra" <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>
Cc: "ga@DNSO.org" <ga@dnso.org>; <ga-ext@dnso.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 3:28 AM
Subject: [ga-ext] Re: [ga] The IC constituency building results so far [was:
stuff]


>
> Thursday, May 10, 2001, 1:45:48 AM, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> > You may listen to the few  insistent  voices that try to discredit this
> > effort for reasons best known to themselves, but in fairness, have a
good
> > read of the Charter first , compare it with the Charters of the other
> > constituencies and keep thinking rules not  personalities.
>
> > The IDNO is a democracy. Any member can run for office. (but who wants
to?)
>
> > Perhaps this is why it is so vigorously opposed?
>
> Joop has seen fit to hold the IDNO up as an example of "democracy" as
> he sees it.
>
> The vigorous opposition to the IDNO does NOT come from those who
> oppose an individual's constituency, but in fact from some of those
> who have most loudly campaigned for one.
>
> The IDNO is not the example of democracy that it's founder wants to
> portray it as.  And if he insists on pursuing this line of argument,
> then the entire mess will be documented here in response to these
> false claims.
>
> Rehashing this argument right now is most certainly NOT in the best
> interests of getting a domain name holder's constituency acted on, but
> rallying support for the IDNO as the example for that constituency is
> also not in the bests interests of a real constituency along those
> lines.
>
> Joop needs to ask himself if the personal glory he seeks through the
> IDNO is worth the price of having this argument again, and if in fact
> he wants to see the effort to get an individual's constituency harmed
> by his insistence on his personal agenda over the interests of
> actually getting this constituency concept advanced further than it
> has in the past.
>
> Make no mistake about it.  The approval of the IDNO as the domain
> holders constituency, even in spirit, would not be in the best
> interests of those whom it claims to want to represent.  And thus
> those who believe in doing what is best for those domain holders will
> oppose it vociferously.
>
> Is that what you want Joop?
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh
> mailto:william@userfriendly.com
> Owner, Userfriendly.com
> Userfriendly.com Domains
> The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-ext@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-ext" 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