[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

History rewriting (Re: [wg-c] Consensus call)

To: "Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>, "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>, "Simon Higgs" <simon@higgs.net>
Subject: History rewriting (Re: [wg-c] Consensus call)
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 09:26:22 +0200
Cc: <wg-c@dnso.org>
In-Reply-To: <001001bfa4dc$b0ee9790$4a0e379d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <XFMail.20000412155001.william@userfriendly.com>
Sender: owner-wg-c@dnso.org

At 17:10 12.04.2000 -0700, Christopher Ambler wrote:
> > Those are really "Jon Postel" submissions (which even he later
>disclaimed), and
> > have no relevance to this process or to ICANN, thank you.
>
>Sorry, I have to call you on this one. Please present documentation of Jon
>Postel
>"disclaiming" the list which he posted, or retract.

ungentlemen,
please don't replay last month's "debate" from the GA list in this forum.

I will AGAIN encourage you to PUT UP YOUR OPINION ON A WEB PAGE.
All of you have a quite clear opinion on what the history was; your histories
are incompatible, and too complex to fit in a single email message.

Repeating the debate piecemeal on a new mailing list every other month 
helps nobody. Especially not yourselves; you're making even me consider 
killfiles.

                        Harald

--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no

References:
- Re: [wg-c] Consensus call
  - From: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
- Re: [wg-c] Consensus call
  - From: "Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>

Prev by Date: Re: [wg-c] CONSENSUS CALLS -- THIS IS IT
Next by Date: Re: [wg-c] Please Explain "No on 1, Yes on 2"
Prev by thread: Re: [wg-c] Consensus call
Next by thread: Re: [wg-c] Consensus call
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread