RE: [ga] NC Review Task Force -- Captured by Business Interests ??

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

|> From: Kent Crispin [mailto:kent@songbird.com]
|> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:17 AM
|> 
|> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 12:56:03PM -0500, DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

|> > Consensus can only be reasonably measured by taking into 
|> > account the vote of those members actively choosing to 
|> > participate in a vote.  
|> > Our members have voted. The results speak for themselves. 
|> > We believe this to be measurable consensus.
|> 
|> Sorry, there is a vast difference -- the character of the 
|> organization matters a great deal. 

It's interesting that you, of all people, should bring up character.
Especially when speaking from an ICANN podium, as you do quite often. I
can't think of a better example of the character of the ICANN. As the ICANN
is the shining temple of integrity and honesty then you are its most perfect
examplar.

|> If an organization is effective, and people pay attention 
|> to it (like the registrar constituency), then the assumption 
|> that people who disagree will speak up is, for the most part, 
|> a valid one.  
|> 
|> The GA, however, is a zoo, and nobody takes it seriously.  
|> Since people don't take it seriously, there is no particular 
|> reason to speak up if it takes an insane or wildly unrealistic 
|> position, and hence the assumption that the people who do 
|> speak up are a consensus is clearly invalid. 

If I understand this properly, you would treat one group with utmost respect
and yet disrespect another, purely on subjective grounds. Maybe, simply
because they have the audacity to disagree with you? In most societies,
that's called a double-standard. One group matters because you chose to let
them matter (and they have money) and another group doesn't matter because
you don't like them. If I hadn't seen the ICANN behave this way myself, for
over two years, I wouldn't have thought that they were this honest. The
light of such honesty is glaring, that's why I will be leaving these lists
soon. How can a greedy little corporate monkey, like me, survive in the
glare of such character and integrity?

But, as you have admitted on the non-com list, you always argue passionately
on the side opposite of the person that you like the least, or that you
think is the most obnoxious, regardless of what you truely believe. That
gives your arguments such universal credibility, regardless of what they
actually are.

http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg03113.html
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg03417.html

Kent, it's been real and it's been fun, but it hasn't been real fun. May you
live in interesting times and may karma return to you exactly what you so
richly deserve. I wish you all the best both now and in successive
incarnations. From now until the time of universal enlightenment, may we
always travel separate paths together.
--
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