Re: [ga] IDNO -- This affects you.

["William S. Lovell" <wsl@cerebalaw.com>]

"Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" wrote:

> Except that this was never true.  How is a business group or an IP group a
> technical constituency?  It isn't and never was.
>
> Much as I like Amadeu, this is revisionism.  But it isn't credible.
>
> On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, William S. Lovell wrote:
>
> > Skipping past the personality issues, I think a bit of history will help
> > explain the dilemma in which those who want an individual domain
> > name holders constituency faces, and this background comes from

[and more blah, blah, blah.]

As I told someone else, it was not my intent to endorse what Amadeu
said, although what I wrote kind of reads like that.  (I take IP above
to mean Intellectual Property and not Internet Protocol.) But in any
case, you're right. Amadeu's sole little squib into the election process
was evidently all it took -- or was all of that preordained in any case?
It seems certain that the GA's input into the election was utterly ignored.

Bill

--
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