[ga] who sets the rules and where's the accountability? - reply todavid conrad

[Gordon Cook <cook@cookreport.com>]

Yo Randy,

your wrote:  Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 16:42:24 -0700
From: "David R. Conrad" <David_Conrad@isc.org>
Organization: Internet Software Consortium
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gordon Cook <cook@cookreport.com>
CC: "Dr. Victoria Carrington" <drvcarrington@echelon.ca>, ga@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [ga] General Comments on the agenda

Yo Gordo,

Grow up.  Not everyone is intent on destroying things they don't agree
with, but instead try to act constructively.

Regards,
-drc

definitions of constructively do differ don't they?  I have been 
watching heath and roberts and the whole ISOC /IAHC/ICANN crowd 
cynically manipulate this for well over a year.  the DNSO has been 
captured by these people well experienced in the arts of virtually 
thuggery.  Constructive you say when they own 15 of the 21 seats, 
won't let the non commercial constituteuncy be formed and have denied 
NSI the 3 seats of the GTLD?  Divide and subdivide mail lists. 
assign and reassign at will.  But what authority?  your ability to 
scratch each others backs by nominating each other for starters 
Don't get me started its a waste of my time.  But let Michael 
Froomkin rebuff you instead.

Read on for Froomkin's opinion of the crap you would countenance.....

who sets the rules Randy?  where the accountability?



Delivered-To: list-outgoing@vrx.net
Delivered-To: list@vrx.net
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 09:24:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: "Dr. Victoria Carrington" <drvcarrington@echelon.ca>
Cc: ga@dnso.org, DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET, list@ifwp.org
Subject: [IFWP] Mailing lists
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-list@ifwp.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: list@ifwp.org

I have found the lists page at dnso.org

Am I allowed to post to any of the working group mailing lists other than
the public list? Am I a member of any of any subgroups?  Am I a
member of these lists? If not, why not?
 
I have also received private e-mail from various people who allege they
were told they could not join WG A.  Is this correct that people were
turned away? If so, can they now be added?

I note further that there is a "no-cross-posts" policy.  How then am I to
bring matters to the attention of the whole group when part of my
complaint is that certain matters fall outside of any group's
jurisdiction?

--
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                     -->   It's hot here.   <--

Delivered-To: list-outgoing@vrx.net
Delivered-To: list@vrx.net
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 10:24:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: list@ifwp.org
Cc: DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET, wg-c@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Javier, what are you doing?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-list@ifwp.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: list@ifwp.org

[someone may need to post this to wg-c@dns.org for me, since I rather
doubt I'm a member]

I agree that list management has suddenly become a crisis.

There are too many lists.  This makes informing oneself hard.  It makes
discussion fractured. It reduces the meaningfulness of consensus.

Not to mention that the lists are hard to subscribe to.  (I am utterly
unclear if I am on any WG-A lists, or even an official member of WGA at
this point.)  If you look at the archives of some lists, it seems as
though all the postings are by one or two people.

That said, I wonder who will claim there is not a rough consensus on the
issue of the need for (some sort of) new gTLDs....

On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, Mark C. Langston wrote:

> Javier, I'm confused.
>
>   First, you complain about people crossposting to wg-c as well as wg-c-1.
>   Then, you personally post one of these crossposts to wg-c-1, even
> though you've claimed that everyone there would have already received it
> not once, but twice.
> ( http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-c-1/Archives/msg00050.html ).
>
>   For the past day at least, conversations have been taking place regarding
> the mechanism for determining consensus, without a decision on the
> mechanism.
>   Last night, you make a call for consensus on one of the questions before
> wg-c-1 ( http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-c-1/Archives/msg00058.html ).
> Before, I note, a co-chair for the WG exists, when the model currently
> under consideration for determining consensus involves the chairs and
> a Reporter (a position which also has not yet been filled).
>
>   Yesterday afternoon, I request to be added to wg-c-1, and a few
> hours later, I request that I be added to wg-c-2.
>   Last night, you add me only to wg-c-2, with no explanation.
>
>   I'm bothered enough that the pDNC has appointed you, a signatory of the
> gTLD-MoU, a member of the BoT of ISOC, a member of the PAB and POC, as
> the chair of the group that will decide questions regarding the existence
> and management of gTLDs.  It troubles me further that you also control
> the subscription processes surrounding this WG, which you've broken into
> 4 seperate lists.
>
> What, exactly, is going on here?
>

-- 
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                     -->   It's hot here.   <--
****************************************************************
The COOK Report on Internet            Index to seven years of the COOK Report
431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA  http://cookreport.com
(609) 882-2572 (phone & fax)           The only Good ICANN is a Dead ICANN
cook@cookreport.com                    What's Behind ICANN and How it Will
Impact the Future of the Internet http://cookreport.com/icannregulate.shtml
****************************************************************