Re: Membership criteria - was [ga] NC BS

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

William - this is no longer the Arpanet and the players here do sue people
when they play games that endanger the valuation of others IPs. You may not
get it but this is not 1974 anymore and this world is about law and process
not some simple agreements between the AirForce and a few university's built
over a bunch of 56k frame circuits. This Internet is a commercial entity and
has real business going on atop it, and so it needs commercial grades of
management as well.

Todd Glassey

----- Original Message -----
From: "William X Walsh" <william@wxsoft.info>
To: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
Cc: "ga@DNSO.org" <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2002 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: Membership criteria - was [ga] NC BS


> Sunday, May 26, 2002, 11:56:17 AM, todd glassey wrote:
>
>
> >> william@wxsoft.info (Fri 05/17/02 at 09:19 PM -0700):
> >>
> >> > > but really, the idea that outreach/input promoted by motion #1
should
> >> > > be spoken of in the same context as (alleged) ballot-stuffing is
ludi-
> >> > > crous.
> >> >
> >> > It's not ballot stuffing, its issue shopping by soliciting voters who
> >> > otherwise are not participants in the process.
> >>
> >> well, you've got to start somewhere. specific issues are an excellent
> >> way to get people involved.
>
> > No William I believe that a three month waiting period would violate my
> > rights to participate in the governing of the Internet since this is an
> > ICANN lobby and would open this SO to being sued from its own members as
> > well as any others it refused to accept votes from because of this
> > prejudicial rule you are talking about.
>
> It is always amusing to see people talk about suing, when they have no
> basis for doing so.  This is two emails I've seen from you on two
> different forums threatening legal action for things that you have no
> basis to take legal action on.
>
> A waiting period would violate no rights, and would open no one to
> lawsuits.
>
>
> >>
> >> > A "residency requirement" of say 3 months would be an effective way
of
> >> > preventing that from occurring, without excluding people for
arbitrary
> >> > reasons.
> >>
> >> and term limits are an effective way of giving incumbents and fanatics
> >> the boot.
>
> > I agree by the way - there are too many squatters in the various layers
of
> > the ICANN. Especially in the PSO's.
>
> You are responding to someone else here.
>
> >> but the point is mechanisms of exclusion, not mechanisms of
> >> exclusion.
>
> > You mean "mechanisms of inclusion, not mechanisms of exclusion" dont
you?
>
> Same here.
>
> Perhaps you should post more carefully and pay attention to who said
> what when responding.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <william@wxsoft.info>
> --
> Save Internet Radio!
> CARP will kill Webcasting!
> http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
>
> --
> 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