Re: [ga] 6000+ unique At Large Members?

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

Denise, you are discredited.

There are so many people sincerely and methodically working for user
representation, democratic accountability, and integrity in the running of
the DNS.

Your spin is a top down process/initiative with no mandate from the people
the ALAC is supposed to be about.

Nobody outside of the ICANN Board asked you to do this.

Nobody elected you to work for the internet user community.

You are simply working as a paid stooge of the very Board which chose to
expel elected At Large representatives.

This is so sick, it is truly insulting to the intelligence of sincere
people.

ICANN and its crass manipulation of power (on behalf of the US government)
is a shame and a disgrace to the reputation of America (ordinary, decent
Americans I mean). It is an embarrassment, and your fake, mock, top-down,
Board-driven "at large" is an embarrassment.

Who are you representing? The Board which pays you.

Says it all.

ALAC does not represent individual internet users.

ALAC exists because it was in the interests of the Board to make it exist.

Individual internet users will organise and represent themselves.

sincerely,


Richard Henderson

----- Original Message -----
From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@sbcglobal.net>
To: Ga@Dnso.Org <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 11:41 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] 6000+ unique At Large Members?


> >-----Original Message-----
> >
> >From: Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>
> >Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 05:05:48 -0400
> >
> >Denise,
> >Thank you for the reply. As you were permitted by Stuart Lynn to use the
> >2000 Election list, perhaps uniquely, would you please expand on
> >the numbers
> >for the benefit of the public in general, including but not limited to:-
> >
> >1) The number of Announce messages generated by ICANN from which the
5,000
> >positive responses resulted.
>
> A single message was sent to the list.
>
> >2) The number of Announce messages that were returned undelivered and
their
> >geographical diversity.
>
> The bounced messages were neither preserved nor analyzed; only positive
> responses were used.
>
> >3) The geographical diversity of the 5,000 positive responses.
>
> That wasn't analyzed either.  In general, email addresses only give you
> hints as to geography; for example, an email address ending in .com, or
> course, could be used by anyone, anywhere.  One could do an analysis by
> domain, but that wasn't done.  It's just an email list for At-Large
> announcements, completely distinct from the old election list.  No names,
> addresses, or other data is associated with these email addresses.
>
> >4) The number of responses invalidated and methodology used.
>
> I don't know what you mean by "invalidated".  People could respond and
> opt-in to the announce list by email, or they could sign-up by going to
the
> web site.  If they responded to the email, their address was put on the
> announce list.
>
> Regards,
> Denise
>
> Denise Michel
> michel@icann.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