Re: [ga-roots] TLD's CONSENSUS

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

Yes I said consensus.

Roots is a full discussion list now. It is viable with good participation and
it lends itself to allowing those who have been involved in these matters a
good opportunity to bring awareness to those of us who have not.
The TLDA is moving forward and with only minimal assistance it will grow into a
helpful association which will lead to further understanding and cooperation
and therefor stability on the Internet.

I think that we agree that the rot controlled by ICANN is not the only root.
That we have alternatives. I think that we all agree that in varying degrees
the alternatives are viable and present different solutions for different
needs. I think that we all agree that ICANN as an organization should not act
antogonistic toward other TLD's in which it is not in control.

NON-CONSENSUS OR CONSENSUS

I am really bummed out that one of the new gTLDs being released through ICANN
and the DOC is dotBIZ, I am even so radical to think it an affront on Belize
where I have spent great times and appreciate their work on developing their
internet. You all know I want to rant against the "affiliations" of the owners
of the new gTLDs, but I will not digress.

But do we really have a problem. There is a huge market chain called Von's here
in California, I also know a small grocery where a second generation ethnic
minority runs his father's business named Von's. I go to Von's for a different
reason than I go to Von's; if you get my point. At three in the morning I could
get medicine for my children at Von's, but after church on sunday I could get
the freshest flowers, avocados and strawberries at Von's. I am certainly glad
they have both been there.

We want both services available.

Sincerely,

Dassa wrote:

> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> On Behalf Of Simon Higgs
> |> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 7:51 AM
> |> To: ga-roots@dnso.org
> |> Subject: RE: [ga-roots] TLD's
> |>
> |> Dassa's not here to create consensus. His sole agenda here
> |> appears to be to disrupt any rational discussion (a more eloquent
> version of
> |> Crispin/Crocker). He steadfastly ignores the true facts and
> |> always finds an opposing opinion which defies logic and is always stated
> as if it were
> |> factual. I suggest filtering him and ignore his massively unproductive
> |> posts. Most lead down false trails and are designed to be deliberately
> |> inflammatory.
>
> And this is your attempt at consensus?
>
> I have not been ignoring any facts but have been questioning the way some
> people portray certain things.  I have also attempted to raise issues that
> are of concern to a large number of others beside myself.  Because I view
> things from a different perspective to yourself or others does not
> necessarily mean my view is illogical or not factual.
>
> The ploy of attempting to get others to ignore a participant is old and
> usually a last resort for someone who doesn't have any solid comments to
> add to a discussion.
>
> But yourself and any others who may disagree with my opinions are free to
> delete my posts or filter them out.  We all have that choice.
>
> It should be pointed out that not listening to opposite or alternative
> views will often lead to a stagnation of your own views.
>
> Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html