RE: [wg-review] 11. IDNH Vote now - all those in favor

[Phil King <yofelipe@excite.com>]

On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 15:01:29 -0500, jo-uk@rcn.com wrote:

>  Dear members,
>  I agree with David's comments below, but surely somebody will counteract
and
>  thus we are all blocked.
>  The fundamental issue is whether or not individuals need representation
in
>  DNSO.
>  If we believe that it is, the bottom line is that we have to demonstrate
>  some progress is being made towards that end, whatever that may be,
however
>  imperfect that may be, as fulfilling one of the duties of this WG.
>  I call upon members to set aside semantics and definitions for a moment
and
>  to consider using the privileged position in which we find ourselves here
to
>  effect change by using action, not words. The polling booth question
>  relating to this issue was unfortunately divisive, but I don't think it
>  would do any harm to take a "snapshot" using this email list to determine
>  all those in favor and against the general idea at this moment in time
for
>  the record.
>  
>  The phrase "along the lines of" can be useful when the essence of a
creative
>  idea needs to be conveyed whilst implying further development will be
>  required to determine the exact form. It's use seems appropriate in the
>  context of this issue.
>  
>  This is the first of two versions of this email I am sending to the list
and
>  ask you please to reply to one of these by putting an X in the box. Both
>  pose the same question. If you want to vote no, do not reply to this
email.
>  
>  QUESTION: "Do you support representation for individuals in DNSO along
the
>  lines of a new "constituency " ?
>  
>  YES [     X    ]
>  
>  
>  Thank you for your time,
>  Regards,
>  Joanna Lane
>  
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: owner-wg-review@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-review@dnso.org]On
>  Behalf Of DPF
>  Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:04 PM
>  To: wg-review@dnso.org
>  Subject: Re: [wg-review] 11. IDNH Centers of Interest
>  
>  
>  On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:31:42 +0100, Robin Miller wrote:
>  
>  >> The 200 odd members of the CA/IDNO support the term owners.
>  >
>  >I don't support the term. I guess that makes it 199 odd members. I
remember
>  not
>  >being alone in my opinion. So strike a few more from the 199.
>  
>  For the record I prefer the term holder to owner also (and am a member
>  of IDNO).  Domain Names are not sold by registries because if they
>  were that would imply registries owned the names in the first place
>  before selling them.
>  
>  DPF
>  ________________________________________________________________________
>  <david at farrar dot com>
>  NZ Usenet FAQs - http://www.dpf.ac.nz/usenet/nz
>  ICQ 29964527
>  --
>  This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
>  Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>  ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
>  Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>  
>  --
>  This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
>  Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>  ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
>  Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>  


Yo, Felipe (I, Phillip)
Phil King
Butte America
(The Richest Hill On Earth)





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/


--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html