RE: [icann-europe] Re: [ga] Re: [icann-europe] new.net and Tiscal i

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

|> From: Marc Schneiders [mailto:marc@schneiders.org]
|> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 3:48 PM
|> 
|> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, at 15:36 [=GMT-0800], Roeland Meyer wrote:
|> 
|> > If you think about it, this is obviously what ICANN wants.
|> > As the main dog in the manger, keeping all other 
|> > cooperative/collective solutions suppressed, the cartel 
|> > approach is the only way left to route around them.
|> > 
|> > The ICANN is either too stupid for words or they are 
|> > cunningly manipulating the internet into a cartel-only 
|> > existance. I don't see a middle-ground interpretation of 
|> > their actions. Maybe my imagination is lacking?
|> 
|> I think your imigination is quite acurate. Unfortunately. 
|> This doesn't mean I have to like the solution of new.net, 
|> or any other counter cartel. 
|> 
|> ICANN may be a cartel (and mainly it is, I think). That doesn't 
|> mean that the way out is a competitor that does not 'talk' with 
|> it. 

I am sure that you are aware of the classic strategy problem of the
"prisoner's dilemma"? Further, that the only consistantly winning strategy
possible is, "tit-for tat"?

There are other principles that I have learned decades ago; Always make sure
that all players have an equal amount of skin in any game you are playing.
Never depend on a competitor's good will. Make sure that any betrayal costs
more than cooperation. Never risk more than you can afford to lose and never
risk a larger percentage of your assets than the other other guy will risk.
Never negotiate with dishonest people and don't play if you can't afford it.

When your opponent won't engage you then the only alternative is to play
"chicken" and see who blinks first. This means that you have to have good
cards face-up, excellent hole cards, and enough cash to stay with the raises
(seven-card stud poker). In business, this usually means "shut up and play"
or "go home". 

|> Yes, I know that the breaking down of Telco monopolies 
|> (I only know about here, Holland) was not easy, but at least 
|> it did not turn into a _mess_. new.net etc means a mess, as 
|> you know. I have seen your efforts to repair this mess on a 
|> technical DNS level, and I appreciate your ideas. But this is 
|> not the way for 'users'.

It may not be, but ICANN is not leaving many choices. The telcos were, at
least, reasonable, in comparison. They had to answer to stockholders and
lived by rules that everyone could understand. The ICANN answers to no one.
There are no stockholders and no investors. The donors that they do have, do
not care for the Internet industry and would rather it dry up and blow away.
That is, those that don't want to own it all. The advisors that the ICANN
does seem to listen to are largely socialist totalitarians with delusions of
power and arrogant tendencies. They patronize everyone else, of note, and
flatly ignore the rest. They are dishonest and corrupt. They move goals at
will and rewrite or ignore their own bylaws with no visible compunction. We
have two years of track-record to prove all of the above (how many board
squatters are there?)

|> We should avoid a mess, really, not because it would not be fun, it
|> would be.

In answer, let me attach something my brother sent me, shortly after
11Sep01;

|> From: MIKE MEYER
|> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 7:23 AM

|> What to do if you happen upon a peace rally by 
|> stupid naive peace advocates, to teach them why 
|> force is sometimes needed:
|> 
|> 1) Approach peace advocate talking about "peace" 
|>    and saying there should be, "no retaliation."
|> 
|> 2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military 
|>    force is appropriate.
|> 
|> 3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"
|> 
|> 4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, 
|>    "Because that would just cause more innocent 
|>    deaths, which would be awful and we should not 
|>    cause more violence."
|> 
|> 5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the 
|>    face as hard as you can.
|> 
|> 6) When he gets back up to punch you, point out 
|>    that it would be a mistake and contrary to his 
|>    values to strike you, because that would, "be 
|>    awful and he should not cause more violence.
|> 
|> 7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not 
|>    to commit additional violence.
|> 
|> 8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.
|> 
|> Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that 
|> sometimes it is necessary to punch back.

--
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