Re: [ga] List moderation

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

On 11-Nov-99 Joop Teernstra wrote:
> Your accusation (of twisting the polling booth text) is false.It was agreed
> that both camps would have their viewpoints represented. Even members who
> preferred your option testified that it was a fair representation of both
> points of view. (direct democracy vs. representational model) The result
> was an even split of the vote.
> After that, the re-railing proposal (a compromise) was adopted by
> overwhelming majority.

This is a blatent LIE.  No one was ASKED to agree that the two descriptions where
fair representations. As a matter of fact, you prevented a motion to require that
type of approval from being put forward.

You wrote what was effectively a lengthy bit of rhetoric full of nothing but
idealisms and buzzwords, that made it very unclear what you meant.  Had there been a
real fair representation of what your proposal meant, I believe the vote would of
been VASTLY different.

Your statement above is a blatent lie, however.  You railroaded out any suggestion
that would of required fair representation descriptions approved by both sides.

Instead the IDNO membership was told it was an important vote, and you misused your
access to the full membership list to send out a message advocating your view point
without providing equal access to the opposing viewpoint, claiming your position as
"bootstrap" afforded you that privilege.

The fact is, that Joop is guilty of nearly every criticism on process in the IDNO
that he has levied against ICANN and its Board. 

We all know the word that describes that kind of behavior.

--
William X. Walsh - DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net  Fax:(209) 671-7934