Re: [registrars] Critical Mass

[Rob Hall <rob@momentous.ca>]

Michael,

I have a problem with the tact you are taking here as the current 
secretariat of the constituency.

It appears to me that your words below were meant to inflame a situation 
that is important to the constituency.  However, your words will only 
further widen the division between the two sides of the issue.

Quotes like "a cancer that had to be cut out and irradiated" will not, in 
my opinion, lead to a cooperative solution.  Trying to obtain consensus 
while hurling words such as these will be very difficult indeed.

I would suggest that as the leader of this discussion, it might be best for 
you to take a more neutral stance, and try to find a solution that truly 
will be a consensus position that ALL registrars can live with.  A 
moderator should typically not take a one sided stance, but should 
facilitate discussion from all sides.   I only see you trying to push 
through a position that clearly more and more registrars are not agreeing 
with (on the last call, you mentioned 2 more that were now 
auto-NACing).  While the majority seem to still favour auto-ACK, I would 
urge you to find a creative solution, as opposed to a battle.

Deepening the battle lines and defending your entrenched position is not in 
the best interest of the constituency.  We need to be united as a registrar 
constituency so that our voice is heard before ICANN clearly on issues that 
effect us all.  Our consistency will, and must, outlast this issue. Please 
work towards mutual cooperation, rather than a war.

Rob.


At 04:14 AM 6/12/2001 -0400, Michael D. Palage wrote:
>Hello All:
>
>Stop and take a deep breath.
>
>The Xfer issue represents a crossroad for the registrar constituency. In
>Stockholm I stated that this Xfer issue was a cancer that had to be cut out
>and irradiated before it ate us alive. We can either unite behind a clear
>consensus position that has emerged and bring an end to this autoNAC process
>which seeks to undermine the stability of a fledging industry, or we can let
>it lead to our self destruction.
>
>Having gone up against NSI over the last two years, there are a couple of
>things that I have learned that I would like to share. In order to prevail
>one must remain calm, cool and collective. When making a point, either in
>the constituency, within ICANN or on the Hill stick to the facts. Moreover,
>whatever facts you use double check them, because NSI and to a lesser extent
>Register.com, are masters of political jujitsu. They will take a valid
>argument and make you look like a disgruntled competitor making
>unsubstantiated allegations.
>
>So what does this all mean. Continue to feed me the factual support that
>demonstrates that the current policy employed by a small handful of
>registrars is detrimental to the industry and most importantly the Internet
>stakeholders for which ICANN is suppose to represent. Those registrars that
>have helped in the drafting of the position paper continue to lend me your
>bandwidth.
>
>I will be traveling and will have limited email access of the next couple of
>days. I look forward to speaking with everyone on Wednesday teleconference.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Mike
>
>P.S. For those that are wondering, no I do not get more than a couple of
>hours a sleep a night :-)



--
Rob Hall                                voice  (613) 768-5100
President                                  fax  (613) 820-0777
Momentous.ca Corp.
rob@momentous.ca                      www.momentous.ca



iti,s