Re: [wg-c-1] Re: [wg-c] WG Chairs

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

This group has less chance of reaching consensus than all of the
groups before it did. For those new to this debate, over the past
4 years, the number of times that we've had consensus has been
one. A single time, during the IFWP process, when we actually
had a large number of the substantive issues worked out and we
were discussing how to hold a "wrap up" meeting to iron out
the last points and go about the job of electing an initial board.

Of course, as you're no doubt aware, that consensus was thrown
out the door, an interim (who now calls itself initial) board
appointed in secret, bylaws created that bear very little
resemblance to what was discussed, and we find ourselves
here.

With a captured DNSO, a pre-ordained outcome, and the
illusion that we might actually reach consensus.

--
Personal Opinion Only, of course...
This email address belongs to a resident of the State of Washington,
who does not accept unsolicited commercial email.
----- Original Message -----
From: <dwmaher@ibm.net>
To: Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>; Ivan Pope <ivan@netnames.com>; wgc-1
<wg-c-1@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 1999 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: [wg-c-1] Re: [wg-c] WG Chairs


> At 12:51 PM 7/13/99 -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
> [clip]
> >Does anyone in POC/CORE understand what it means to work with other
groups and
> >to try to find consensus? Do they understand that further domination of
the
> >process by this small faction is a continuing threat to the legitimacy of
> >ICANN?
> Ad hominem attacks on POC/CORE are not advancing the process of reaching
> consensus.
> David Maher
>