[ga-roots] Re: ICANN Criticizes Alternative Roots

["List Admin" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

To: Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 15:12:04 -0700
Subject: Re: [ga-roots] Re: ICANN Criticizes Alternative Roots
Cc: Patrick Corliss <patrick@quad.net.au>, "[ga-roots]" <ga-roots@dnso.org>
Subject: BOUNCE ga-roots@dnso.org: Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
<dhc@dcrocker.net>]


1.  Your pointer does not point to a copy of the original.

2.  Even if the personal note from Lynn was added later, so what?  Are we
supposed to require instantaneous perfection from everyone, or are they
allowed to modify things, to improve them?

d/

At 11:20 AM 5/29/2001, Joanna Lane wrote:
> > From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
> > To: Chris Chiu <CCHIU@aclu.org>
> > Cc: Ncdnhc-Discuss@Lyris. Isoc. Org (E-mail)
> <ncdnhc-discuss@lyris.isoc.org>
> > Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 09:22:03 -0700
> > Subject: Re: ICANN Criticizes Alternative Roots
> >
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > Constructive discussion is not aided by misrepresenting the work of
others.
> >
> > At 08:05 AM 5/29/2001, Chris Chiu wrote:
> >> In a draft document posted May 28, 2001, the Internet Corporation for
> >> Assigned Names and Numbers
> >
> > The draft is clearly labeled as an exercise by Stuart Lynn, not "ICANN".
>
>The original post has been changed. For a copy of the original, see
>http://www.internetstakeholders.com, where the text was first posted at
>03:08 EDT, May 29th, about the same time I notified this list. The article
>would be clearly labeled "by Stuart Lynn" and a copy of his comments
>included had it existed at the time. Those that read the post before the
>change would not have known it was Mr Lynn, as I did not until just now.
>
>Regards,
>Joanna
>
> >
> >
> >> accused supporters of alternative domain name
> >> roots (ADNRs) of having "insular motives"
> >
> > He did not accuse "supporters".  He quite accurately labeled the
> > alternative roots, themselves.  That is, the people who created
> > them.  That's not a small difference, Chris.
> >
> >
> >> and argued that it had a public
> >> "mandate" based on self-described "community-based processes"
> >
> > The term has been applied to ICANN long before the paper and by many,
many
> > others.  So, "self-described" is factually false.
> >
> > It's a shame that the fact that ICANN is so massively more open and
global
> > than any other equivalent process is lost on folks.
> >
> > d/
> >
> > ----------
> > Dave Crocker   <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
> > Brandenburg InternetWorking   <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> > tel: +1.408.246.8253;   fax: +1.408.273.6464
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >

----------
Dave Crocker   <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking   <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel: +1.408.246.8253;   fax: +1.408.273.6464



--
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