Re:Attn. Erick Dierker "Spinmister?" [ga] Outreach-Procedural Bullshit

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Eric and all assembly members,

Eric Dierker wrote:

> After reviewing the several reviews that have occurred on this subject
> throughout ICANN's history, you can see a pattern that the NC and the
> BoD are simply following the participants desire which is not to conduct
> outreach.

  Not at all really.  In fact just the opposite.  Although it is true and
has been
for some time that the ICANN BoD and staff as well as the NC have blocked
participation by any and all interested parties and/or stakeholders/users.
It
is not true, as you attempt to spin it here Eric, that this is what the
participants
desire or otherwise want.  Quite the contrary, as you well know and we
have discussed over the phone and in several E-mail exchanges, as well
as a number of willing potential participants on the DNSO GA list, which
were blocked, and are still blocked from participating because of inane
DNSO GA list rules or SELECTIVE CENSORSHIP.

>
>
> I have watched many good outreach web sites go up stemming from the DNSO
> work.

  And many are still active.

>  Good bad or indifferent they all help outreach in some degree.

  No they do not necessarily.  Some are organizations that seek to limit
participation by only certain groups that share a very specific political
bent that may or may not be friendly to what ICANN is supposed
to be or become.

>
> The list for continuing work of the WG-Review and Joannas' site come to
> mind as does some kind of site Sotiris ran where you could conference,
> Many good votes have taken place on Joops' voting site. I note that both
> the Watch and the Blog are void of large letter disclaimers of their
> official status of ICANN affiliation-both run by esteemed Attorneys.
> They are also all attacked by those blocking outreach which includes
> bringing anyone in that is not a professional of some sort.

  Yes, many of these groups or organization do limit their membership
to a particular political bent. As does the ICANN BOD and staff, the
ICANN Constituencies, the DNSO GA, the PSO, the ASO, APNIC,
IETF, ISOC, and oh yes lets not forget the IESG as well...

>
>
> I think the point of the motion regarding icannworld may be very valid,
> but only because it is my considered opinion that the Bulk of active
> participants do not want any type of outreach that may diminish their
> own standing to be heard and their opinion revered.

  What is ICANNWORDL.ORG?  Form the website it has not members,
it has no method showing or even describing how one can join, yet it
perports to have the support, falsely of the DNSO GA.  That is just
plain dishonest, Eric.  And that is getting such an organization off to
a bad start in these very paralysis times with other organizations
of various types harboring terrorists and other less than honest
"Operators".

>
>
> Certainly the prevention of educational sites for outreach is consistent
> with reducing the At Large Seats and requiring domain name ownership for
> membership.

  Not at all.  There is not prevention of educational sites under .EDU or
.ORG presently.  This is not to mention .US as well.  So your statement
here is not only unfounded, it is seemingly a blatant spin or twist of the
known facts.  And you know them, as you have commented to them
on this forum yourself on a number of occasions..

>
>
> The BoD yesterday made great progress yesterday because it recognized
> this type of squabbling over form and not substance as exactly what it
> is; procedural Bullshit.

  You cannot have good substance without good process.  As I followed
the meeting, there seemed to be very little of consequence and benefit
accomplished, as was also true today.

>
>
> I am sure that the pending motion will not be needed.  Certainly Danny
> will change the site or pull it down altogether and there will be
> another victory for procedural Bullshit.

  He should not pull it down IMHO.  But he should remove the statement
that the DNSO GA is supporting it.  Than put forth a motion requesting
the DNSO GA members support and make his case why we should
support it.

>
>
> Jeff, Sotiris, and William are all exactly right on the impropriety of
> form here and they could not be more wrong in invoking procedural
> bullshit to block positive attempts at outreach.  My congratulations to
> three smart guys.

  Thank you for the wonderful compliment.  But it is not just WXW, Sotiris,
and I that are objecting/questioning thus far as you also well know.
See in the archives:http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02634.html
from Sandy Harris and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02638.html
from Joanna Lane, and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02643.html
from Richard Kroon, and
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02645.html
from Daryl Lynch and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02648.html
from John Palmer, and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02649.html
from Steven Heath, and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02650.html

from Michael Froomkin, and
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02659.html
from Patrick Corliss.

>
>
> Eric
>
> ps.
> (why didn't someone just ask him to change it?, all of this commotion
> has occurred and he has not even seen a word of it as he is attending
> the security meetings)

  No one should've had to.  He knew and knows that what is was
doing before he did it is and remains very wrong and does not engender
trust.  Without a certain amount of trust, you loose any real support
in the present and more loss of support in the future.

>
> --
> 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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