Re: Why ICANN should think (Re: Re[2]: [ga-roots] RE: [ga] Can yougive me some arguments, why is it a bad idea?)

[Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>]

On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, at 20:58 [=GMT-0700], William X. Walsh wrote:
> > Friday, June 01, 2001, 5:45:22 PM, Marc Schneiders wrote:
> >> On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, at 17:18 [=GMT-0700], William X. Walsh wrote:
> >> > Friday, June 01, 2001, 6:33:46 AM, Bruce James wrote:
> >> 
> >> > ""another root "" Would be asking for trouble from the other Alternate
> >> > Roots. The whole idea is to come to an "understanding" with the Alternate
> >> > Roots so we can co-exist.

> >> There is no reason for competitive root systems to come to any
> >> accommodation with competitors, unless they gain something from the
> >> relationship.
> 
> > Stability, stability, stability?
> 
> ICANN has that without the alt.roots.  ICANN has that by completely
> ignoring them.

Sure, one can also ignore bicycles as a car driver and survive. Those
on the bike might get killed in the process. But my guess is, that
your car will not look nice after a few collisions.

Your stability is one established by force and fight.  

--
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