Re: [ga] FYI

[Joe Baptista <baptista@pccf.net>]

old history - were now debating rules of proceedure and policies on how to
behave.  I'm supporting roberts rules of order.

regards
joe baptista

On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 WmsPtur@aol.com wrote:

> 
> After reading all these messages for months, I was about to applaud Mr. 
> Gaetano for:
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote: 
> 
> > Folks,
> > 
> > For your information, I have asked DNSO Listadmin to prevent postings in
> >  my name to be distributed to the GA List when not coming from my
> > address.
> > 
>     Then, I received the gloating message, apparently from Mr. Baptista, that 
> read:
> 
> >Date:  01/04/2000 11:42:35 AM Mountain Standard Time
> >From:  roberto.gaetano@voila.fr (Roberto Gaetano)
> >Sender:    owner-ga@dnso.org
> >Reply-to:  <A HREF="mailto:roberto.gaetano@voila.fr">roberto.gaetano@voila.fr
> </A>
> >To:    ga@dnso.org
> 
> >Subject : Re: [ga] FYI
> 
> >This is Joe Baptista letting Roberto Gaetano know his attempt to censor 
> failed,
> 
> >God bless unix and all who would sail in her.
> 
>     It would seem from the headers contained on this message from the 
> redoubtable Mr. "Baptista", that he really is Mr. Gaetano.  This is all 
> getting very confusing.  
> 
> <Return-Path: <owner-ga@dnso.org>
> <Received: from  rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225]) 
> by air-<zd05.mail.aol.com (v67.7) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Jan 2000 13:42:34 -0500
> <Received: from  dnso.dnso.org (dnso.dnso.org [192.134.4.239]) by 
> rly-<zd01.mx.aol.com (v67.7) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Jan 2000 13:42:29 -0500
> <Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
> <   by dnso.dnso.org (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) id TAA24608;
> <   Tue, 4 Jan 2000 19:30:13 +0100 (MET)
> <Received: from smtp2.minitel.net (smtp-voila.minitel.net [193.252.91.23])
> <   by dnso.dnso.org (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA24604
> <   for <ga@dnso.org>; Tue, 4 Jan 2000 19:30:12 +0100 (MET)
> <Received: from voila.fr (ns1.vrx.net [204.138.71.254])
> <   by smtp2.minitel.net (Postfix) with SMTP id BB9334F853
> <   for <ga@dnso.org>; Tue,  4 Jan 2000 19:29:06 +0100 (MET)
> <From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>
> <Reply-To: roberto.gaetano@voila.fr
> <To: <ga@dnso.org>
> <Message-Id: <20000104182906.BB9334F853@smtp2.minitel.net>
> <Date: Tue,  4 Jan 2000 19:29:06 +0100 (MET)
> <Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
> <Precedence: bulk
> 
> While I have nothing better to do than read all 247 posts from the 
> <ga@dnso.org> that appeared between 1/4/2000 and 1/11/2000, it surprises me 
> that this is anybody's idea of how this august group is supposed to forge :-) 
> the New World Order of Domain Names and Numbers.  Perhaps, rather than 
> dwelling on Mr. Baptista's antics, impressive as they may be, we ought to 
> just go on about whatever the business is that this list once meant to be 
> about.  If the noise level sometimes (far) exceeds the signal, there is 
> always the delete button.  
>     I have lately been registering domain names with more letters in them 
> than anyone will ever want to type in.  I have not gotten up to 63 letters, 
> but enough that I know I would not be willing go much further.  Since all of 
> these names are just acronyms for the numbers that underlie them, and the 
> names will eventually be meaningless by their sheer volume in every language, 
> why not begin now to assign every address by number, like our telephone 
> systems, or our credit cards, or our residential addresses, then let each 
> country's trademark dispute system battle out the conflicts that arise 
> between those who think they already own whatever slogan their number 
> represents and those who would usurp that slogan.  At least, that way, we do 
> not reinvent all the law and practice of intellectual property rights 
> worldwide, without any reference to what has gone before.     
>