Re: [ga] Names Council Task Forces

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

Patrick and all assembly members,

  The "Special purpose" GA mailing lists mostly served to split up
the GA members into categories rather than the  issues.  As such
they became unpopular and therefore not useful.

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:26:04 -0800, William X Walsh wrote:
>
> > No one was hoodwinked.  This is the way things are supposed to work.
> >
> > The sub lists you tried to create were nothing but a censorship trip
> > to get subjects off the main list, and so that alt.root interests
> > could dominate the discussion of alt.root interests since they knew
> > that only the most vocal alt.root opponents would join,
>
> Hi William
>
> I am often amazed at your effrontery.  You baldly state the most arrant
> nonsense in the hope that some idiot somewhere will believe what you have
> said.
>
> There were, as I remember, seven special purpose mailing lists.  Only one of
> these related to Alt Roots.  The whole set was designed to cover all issues of
> interest to the GA including UDRP, registration systems (whois, registrar
> transfers, etc), GA rules, dot org, and DNSO review.
>
> And, as you know, the ALT Root discussion was effectively scuppered by the
> paper unilaterally issued by Stuart Lynn without debate or any form of
> "conensus" building.
>
> You will no doubt remember, I created agendas for each list and encouraged
> people to develop a terms of reference for important issues like WHOIS.  The
> idea was that those who were interested in a particular topic could form a
> dedicated working group to debate the issues.
>
> There is NO difference whatsoever between my sugggestion and that adopted by
> the Names Council except that the NC proposal has legitimacy (as a result of
> the ICANN bylaws) which you argued that the original proposal lacked.
>
> However, the original proposal invited everybody on the list to participate.
> Members with particular expertise (including yourself, Joanna Lane, Bill
> Lovell and others) were invited to become Working Group Chairs or Co
> Ordinators.
>
> Sorry, Bill, the current NC version has only ONE person representing the GA on
> each working group.  In three cases, that one person is Danny Younger who you
> have regularly accused of running his own agenda.
>
> I would hardly call that genuine participation be the membership of the
> Assembly !!
>
> And it's quite astonishing how you bend your argument to suit your agenda of
> undermining any proposal which you think has the remotest chance of being made
> to work.
>
> Regards
> Patrick Corliss
>
> --
> 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