Re: [wg-review] GA 2

[Eric Dierker <Eric@HI-TEK.COM>]

In trucker parlance, thats a big ten four good buddy, your 1020 speaks loud and
clear on all channels, lets move this convoy down the divide to the otherside.

Ladies and gentlemen let us proceed with vigilance and move forward toward
education of us new comers and maintain the high ground. We are all after the
same result. Where someone is coming from becomes obvious and we should embrace
their perspective. Then synthesize the concepts into our own motivations for
speaking.

Think how far this gets us toward multilingualism, which really is about
acceptance.

sincerely

Phil King wrote:

> On Target!
> yes, Mr. Auerbach and Mr. Crispin, and others with concrete data/info for
> us. We value you. Mr. Crispin, I was not kidding in an offlist item I sent
> you, Glad you are here.
>
> We need to keep the achivable and necessary output of the wg going and keep
> the wg relevant and active!
> Phil in Butte
> On Fri, 02 Feb 2001 15:03:49 -0800, Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >  Phil King wrote:
> >
> >  > Eric, this may have been answered in the day between my reading and
> it's
> >  > posting.  I see no mystery with the fact that this came up when it did.
> >  > This is so far the most successfull slowdown of productive discussion
> in
> >  > terms of time wasted since I've been on the list (24 Dec).  I don't
> know if
> >  > it is the specific subject we want to review, GA, or just cut our
> output, or
> >  > our credibility.  Machs Nicht, there is a little discussion but it's in
> the
> >  > background, and hard to keep track of.  (and I wax verbose, again!)
> Phil in
> >  > Butte!
> >
> >  Let me just put it on the table.  There are basically two opposing
> reasons for
> >  wanting this review to fail.  Squash it and maintain status quo, i.e.
> remain in
> >  position, or squash it and use it as an example that ICANN cannot
> function and
> >  must therefore be replaced by........  Either way it is the precious
> contracts
> >  that are being fought over.
> >  Now to bring this on to point.
> >
> >  The GA as it is, is window dressing to show compliance with the charge of
> >  representing the ICW. If we fix it and make it really work then the two
> >  positions related above are in danger.
> >
> >  Therefore this may be the most important issue of all, but it can only
> occur
> >  through the education, communication and outreach which is late on our
> list. A
> >  review of the June report of the WG on outreach and history to this point
> is
> >  right on point, that was basically killed by the same technique as this
> WG
> >  almost was, timing making it irrelevant.
> >
> >  This is why I again invite members such as Mr. Crispin and Mr. Auerbach
> to
> >  continue our tutoring. It is not their positions that are important it is
> the
> >  existance of the positions, and our knowledge of them. The single most
> helpful
> >  current mechanism in this regard IMHO is
> >  http://www.lextext.com/icann/index.html.
> >
> >  If I am on point we surely will know by the response to this post.
> >
> >  Sincerely,
> >
> >  P.S. Do the still have that downhill course where we actually had to
> prejump a
> >  road. NCAA Championship '77.
> >
>
> 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