[ga-rules] Re: [ga] GA Credibility.

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Bill and all,

William S. Lovell wrote:

> Roeland Meyer wrote:
>
> >
> > This has given me a wonderful opportunity to step back to the 50,000 foot
> > view of these lists. It occurs to me that we have been so aggressively
> > bashing each other, in public, that a cursory review of these proceeding
> > will show the casual observer that NONE of us should be trusted with even as
> > much as a sharp tooth-pick. It might be used as a weapon. Jim Dixon's
> > comments wrt "adult supervision", of a few years back, comes to mind.
>
> Roeland:
>
> Truer words were never spoken! :-)
>
> >
> > Regardless of where one falls, on these issues, one can't help but recognise
> > the stunning lack of credibility of a body with such highly credentialed
> > folks in attendance.
>
> Here we start to divide.  These highly credentialed folks are credentialed in
> fields that have little to do with a lot of what's now being raised. Being an
> expert on roots or whatever helps very little when talking about truly social,
> issues rather than technology.

  There are no social solutions to technical problems or considerations.  Only
technical ones.  As such I don't see your consideration here as being a valid
one and must agree in principal with Roeland.

>
>
> > It's an anomally. Having met many of you F2F, I might
> > also point out that much of the on-list behavior is a caricature of the
> > normal F2F presentation of many of you.
> >
> > In addition, many of have realized for quite sometime that, the DNSO/GA is a
> > beard for the ICANN. It is intended to show the non-ICANN world that the
> > ICANN is indeed open. What it also does is demonstrate, for the ICANN, that
> > general transparency isn't ready for prime-time. It is the strongest
> > argument against the @LArge that the ICANN has. A demonstration of chaos, if
> > you will.
>
> But open to what? Well, I think we've answered that.  Certainly very little in
> the way of constructive progress.  I was chatting with some others earlier about
> the

> IFWP days, and I must say that the GA mirrors that to a T.  I have myself argued
> for
> and voted for the Individual Constituency, and hope it comes about, but if and
> when
> it does, it will be of considerable interest to see whether anything other than a
> change in name comes of it.  I hope you will all prove my scepticism to be wrong.
>
> See my latest at ga-icann, and that's it for today.  Gotta make a living, when I
> should be basking at the beach.
>
>          Bill Lovell
>
> http://cerebalaw.com/biog.htm

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


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