RE: [ga] Santiago DNSO GA Chair

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Amadeu
> Abril i Abril
> Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 7:58 AM

> * Singapore and Berlin meetings were unanimous (well...) in
> the feeling that no single org should be able to appoint more than one
NC rep.
> NSI did not disopute this.
>
> * NSI designated three reps (Don Telage, Richard Sexton and
> Joop Teernstra),
> The BoDasked them to reconsider the decision and appoint only one, and
> representing gTLD interests.

First off, those folks aren't really NSI folk. Sexton, particularly is
part of VRx.NET and does run their own gTLDs and is the master keeper of
the ORSC root. These gTLD are already implemented and exist. They have
for years. But they aren't recognised by ICANN. Never mind that they've
been around longer than the ICANN has. You know this and ignore it at
your convenience. Could it be because the ORSC was the ONLY other
credible alternative to the ICANN itself, as a direct result of the IFWP
process? It's very existance threatens the ICANN? That the ORSC ALSO
presented the ONLY consensus driven DNSO application at Singapore? That
you, the DNSO.ORG, and the ICANN want to disenfranchise them because you
are afraid that they may possibly derail your dictates?

NSI is forced to be the only member of the gTLD constituency because of
ICANN myopia and reclacitrance. NSI is offering a seat, at the NC table,
to those dis-enfranchised and already extant gTLD registries. A factoid
that you and others conveniently ignore, just so that you can
participate in the NSI-bashing that ICANN is engaging in. Joop is the
ELECTED representative of the IDNO, yet another dis-enfranchised group
that actually has more of a democratic organization than ANY other DNSO
constituency. NSI was offering the IDNO a NC participation as well. In
short, it is NSI's attempt to right some of ICANN's wrongs. To portray
this as some sort of NSI coup attempt, especially when you know better,
is just plain wrong.

This actually presents the lie behind Javier's earlier statement
regarding DNSO openness. The ICANN is a foregone conclusion, we know
that they run a railroad.

Like it as not, I am working with what is available, but these cheap
shots of yours are unbearable. Grow up Amadeu. At least, tell the truth.