Re: [ga] Position Paper for your consideration

[Eric Dierker <eric@HI-TEK.COM>]

Mr. Peter,

Your bottom line dollar evaluations are less than satisfactory to us
dotcommoners.  Make a stand if you can and give me six months and I will
double, no triple, your dollar figures.  But make a stand.  Otherwise take
your pencil pushing geeks and go away.  Let me put it another way, put up or
shut up buster.  Those three seats belong to my dotcommoners not a bunch of
ragtag carpet bagging cctld managers masquerading as caring representatives
of my people.  Show some bottom up representativeness or go back to the VI
or wherever you claim to belong to.

If that was rude I truly apologize but I wanted to make sure you understand
that the people own this NET and not any conglomerate of business.  We own
you and not the other way around.

May the abundance of love find itself an adoptive creature on your door
step, and may you spurn other worldly desires and reach and find that love
which is within you.  All of you have happiness within you, please reach out
and find it.

Eric

Peter de Blanc wrote:

> I would suggest a re-evaluation of the degree of representation on the
> ICANN board (ASO and PSO), especially vis-a-vis the financial
> contribution level, and the relative contributions to global Internet
> (political) policy.
>
> Peter de Blanc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Jefsey
> Morfin
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 5:03 PM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] Position Paper for your consideration
>
> On 19:06 30/09/01, DannyYounger@cs.com said:
> >We agree with the assessment of the ALSC that the ASO and PSO, in
> >general, seem to be functioning well, and submit that there would be no
>
> >apparent justification for any changes either in their structure or in
> >their degree of representation on the Board.
>
> I am afraid, Danny, that I absolutely oppose that. PSO should only tell
> people the nr of the line their protocol has been recorded in. But
> mission
> creep is here instead of cross-fertilization catalysis as we observe it.
> We
> can say that the Internet protocols do not match the Internet
> architecture
> in term of user autonomy and security. IRT ASO, the lack of education,
> concern and involvement of the Global Internet Community through @large
> or
> a ASO/GA will probably result in a dramatic situation for real of
> several
> magnitudes more important that the fake DNS debate. Billions of cost for
>
> centuries, blocking of the Network, multiple BigBrothers, major
> innovation
> delays, ...
>
> So what we can say is that @large presence at SO through a GA is of the
> essence. An SO must be conceived as a governance structure with
> participating constituencies, council, GA, Secretariat, MLs, site,
> etc...
>
> Jefsey
>
> --
> 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

--
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