Re: [ga] GA position on Verisign contract

[Eric Dierker <Eric@hi-tek.com>]

I, myself have been more of a silent participant lately.  And while I was abroad,
I found the amount of mail often annoying and it just hit me that I did not
"unsubscribe" because I remained dedicated to learning and interested and ready
to act when I felt required.  I also related the information to many others who
like my summary but did not dare care to sign up.  I even think of the sites that
report on what happens here when deserving in their judgment.  I also think of
the responses from the BoD and NC when a post here requests it.
I often am amazed at the think tank that posts here.  And I give special thanks
to you intellectual and trained giants that contribute.
The GA meeting room had plenty of attendees in Melbourne but few got up to speak,
I also counted over thirty online particpants inside/out.  I am convinced that
those that remain on list are generally participating.  Actions and consensus
achieved here have the backing of the interested masses.
Sincerely,

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello Marilyn,
>
> Sunday, March 25, 2001, 4:02:48 PM, Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:
>
> > Thanks, William. But, actually, not very many people voted, did they?  I
> > know that timing is a problem.  Given how many folks are signed up for the
> > GA, can we say that there is consensus?  I know, some think that failure to
> > vote, means agreement.
>
> No, the failure to vote means that they have consented to not being
> taken into account, and it has absolutely no meaning whatsoever that
> should be taken into account.
>
> It's a tactic agreement with whatever the result is, since by not
> participating they have voluntarily given up their right to object to
> it being the consensus.
>
> The actual number participating is really not that important, except
> to those who oppose the consensus and want to make it appear
> illegitimate.
>
> I saw Chuck make that argument in a half-way fashion as well.  I found
> it kind of amusing, since I could tell it goes against his personal
> grain to make such an argument, but in his role as a representative of
> Verisign, he had to make it (not to mention that this agreement will
> almost certainly make his stock options worth a lot more).
>
> One cannot claim that because people were silent that the consensus is
> invalid.
>
> If they were silent, they were silent by their own choice. Either they
> didn't want their opinion taken into account, they had no opinion, or
> they saw that there was already sufficient support for their position
> and saw no reason to enter the fray.
>
> Those are the only reasonable and legitimate conclusions that can be
> drawn from the level of non-participation.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  William                            mailto:william@userfriendly.com
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html