Re: [ga] RE: [gad] GA Consensus Creation for the KC situation

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Marilyn,

That is about the most insincere thing you have ever posted.

Security in the Internet is Technical.  A proper link between Bethesda and the
Afghan desert may be all that saves a life in surgery, or information on a
spreading disease.  I am sure that you are quite busy with "MLIFE"
and matters of only commercial matters so you probably missed a great deal.

Technical matters effect the lives of millions, they educate children and
entertain millions, they help provide for alternative sources of power for life
support systems.  The issues of US centric and IPv3 effect the stability and
reliability of the WWW.

Your NC is busy enough violating laws and by-laws I think you should not
overextend into an area where you risk some political weight you may need later.

Eric

"Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" wrote:

> Has anyone on the GA who is raising a concern about Kent stopped to ask what
> his job is, and whom it impacts?  IF it is interfacing with the technical
> community, what is the objection which is being raised? Has the technical
> community objected to his technical credentials? If his job is something
> else, who is most impacted? what is that sector's thoughts.
>
> Just a thought. My own thought is: "Oh, good; thanks for the update. Now,
> back to work."
>
> :-)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DPF [mailto:david@farrar.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 1:20 PM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] GA Consensus Creation for the KC situation
>
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2002 10:56:08 -0600, k@widgital.com (Kristy McKee)
> wrote:
>
> >Because I believe our opinion is valid and counts for something, I think we
>
> >should agree to agree and disagree about this in a formal fashion;
> >therefore from the posts:
> >
> >DNSO GA consensus of Kent Crispin's appointment:
>
> I do not think it helps the GA's credibility to start taking straw
> polls on whether or not we like a particular technical staff
> appointment.
>
> There are more important issues out there.  Only around three GA
> members have commented on the Structure Taskforce drafts!!  Again only
> around three GA members have commented on the proposal to change the
> term or grant a waiver for the NC Chair.  These are issues where we do
> have some influence and or even a vote.
>
> DPF
> --
> david@farrar.com
> ICQ 29964527
> --
> 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@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