Re: [ga] nominations

[Dnsipv6@aol.com]

Joe and everyone else,

  I don't see a "Richard" either.  Is this Randy guy a nut or
something?  Sure seems like it!

In a message dated 99-09-19 22:52:47 EDT, you write:

<< Subj:     Re: [ga] nominations
 Date:  99-09-19 22:52:47 EDT
 From:  baptista@pccf.net (J. Baptista)
 Sender:    owner-ga@dnso.org
 To:    randy@psg.com (Randy Bush)
 CC:    fanego@pccf.net (Sr. Francisco Fanego), ga@dnso.org
 
 Randy, it's Joe and Frank here.  I don't see Richard, do you see Richard?
 
 In any event, it's you maybe happy with icann's finances, I'm not.  I want
 to know why it's costing us 5 million to run a rinky dink operation which
 only requires 600,000/yr.  So if your happy with an operating increase of
 830% may I suggest you stay out of financial discussions.  I don't think
 your qualified here, the art department is done the hall, engineering in
 the rear.
 
 Sorry Randy, but this is a critical issue.  5 million today, 500 million
 tommorrow, that is the nature of governing bodies.
 
 regards
 Joe Baptista
 
 On Sun, 19 Sep 1999, Randy Bush wrote:
 
 > > Is ICANN accountable to me and the internet community - or is it
 > > accountable to the doc?  If it's accountable to me and the internet
 > > community, I want to see that accountability in the form of a financial
 > > statement.
 > > 
 > > If ICANN is accountable and run by the DOC, then I have a right to access
 > > that information via an FOI request.  It damed if you do and damed if you
 > > don't either way.
 > 
 > talking to yourself again, richard?  and you still don't make much sense.
 > 
 > i already know more than i care about icann's finances.  the issue to me is
 > getting enough sane folk on the board to plan and budget sensibly.  and
 > standing around bitching and moaning does not strike me as a productive way
 > to do so.  in fact, it seems the opposite, to be distraction action.  but
 > this is not new for you, is it.
 > 
 > randy
 > 
  >>
David "Dude" Jenson