Re: [ga] Santiago DNSO GA Chair - Amadeu non-germain comments..

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

Amadeau and all,

  Ok Amadeu, I have read several exchanges between you and Mark
Langston, and I see some serious problems in both tone and substance
on your part.  (See more specifics below)..

Amadeu Abril i Abril wrote:

> Mark C. Langston wrote:
> [..]
>
> > Were any of those members actually there at the behest of their
> > respective constituencies, officially representing the will of the
> > constituencies?  Was there one such individual from each
> > constituency?
> >
> Mark,
>
> To be short and polite: each consituenct us free to carry its business as they
> prefer, unless this creates problems to the DNSO.

  First of all Mark was not referring to each "Constituent" but each "Constituency"
the difference between the two is striking...  Second, in either case, be it
"Each Constituent" or "Each Constituency", there can be NO exceptions as
to how a Constituent or a Constituency conducts it's business as it refers
to the DNSO per se, as the Constituent or a Constituency are self determined
entities by the definition.  Hence whether or not the DNSO "Likes" the manner
in which either a Constituent or a Constituency conducts it's business
is not Germane or for that matter, relevant in any proper or reasonable context.

>
>
> Pleae provide any evidence of a single complaint within any constituency
> regarding the question yu raise. If they felt representedd, and have no
> complaint, so should you be, Mark.
> [...]
>
> > "each recognized constituency" meaning from the ccTLD, commercial/business,
> > gTLD, ISP, registrar, and TM/IP constituencies.
> >
> > Even if someone somehow managed to find people meeting all those criteria
> > from the other constituencies, there was no one there from the gTLD
> > constituency, by your own admission.
> >
> > The bylaw does not state, "except for those who don't feel like
> > participating."
>
> Hell, Mark, you're happy not to be one of my law students ;-))

  I am sure he is, and are many of us.  Many people prefer to learn from
someone that is adequately knowledgeable, you appear not to have
the proper knowledge by which one could learn much, judging from this
post....  >;)

>
>
> Your interpretation leads to absolute unilateral veto power for each and every
> consituency by simply not "nominating" reps in the sense you imply. This could
> not be more antithetic to the whole DNSO and ICANN history, tradition and rules.

  It is a shame that your interpretation is both invalid here and again not
adequately germane as well, irrespective of context.

>
>
> Arfumentaton ad absurdum, no matter how well constructed, is the first thing
> law studnets learn to escape from. I guess this could also apply here.

  Yes it could.  A shame that you have yet to learn them adequately.

>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Amadeu, writing his last mail of the day to GA (self-imposed "nosie reduction" mesure)

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members 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:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208