Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #74
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Saturday, May 27 2000            Volume 01 : Number 074

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:05:19 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: [IFWP] PCCF to close for the Summer

Joe and all remaining assembly members,

  As I lived in Japan for some time, and am especially familier with
Yokohama and the availability of sexual pleasure activities, I am sure that
MR. Cohen has already made his arrangements.

!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:

> The dot.god universe has exploded - I think that is clear.  And unlike
> ICANN - I know where the cookie is buttered - so to speak.  Therefore - it
> is with the greatest of pleasure that I announce I have been given
> permission to close down PCCF for the summer.
>
> Furthermore - the ICANN production for Yokohama will be postponed.  I'll
> go ahead with my regular government emailings - however I will not be
> bothering with Mr. Cohen on this round.
>
> Regards
> Joe Baptista

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:04:53 -0700
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Status of ICANN PINs

On Fri, May 26, 2000 at 08:40:43PM +0200, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> Mikael,
> 
> >Did you apply for ICANN membership?
> >Are you still waiting for the PINs?
> >
> >So did I, but thanks to Esther Dyson I can tell you that they're being
> >sent this week.  To save money, ICANN is sending them in bulk, all at 
> once
> >(at least the applications so far).
> 
> Thanks for the info.
> 
> BTW, personally I found that to save money on several thousand stamps is
> , at the end, a rather wise decision. In particular considering that 
> there was no pressure to have them out earlier, was it?

According to Andrew M. in a message to the MITF, there were over 16000
applications for membership.  That's a lot of letters to fold, put into 
envelops, and send out.

> 
> Regards
> Roberto
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:35:37 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Status of ICANN PINs

At 02:04 PM 5/26/00 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>According to Andrew M. in a message to the MITF, there were over 16000
>applications for membership.  That's a lot of letters to fold, put into
>envelops, and send out.

gack.  i sure hope they are using the machines available for such otherwise 
painful work...

d/

=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker  <[email-masked]>
Brandenburg Consulting  <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253,  Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:35:49 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Status of ICANN PINs

Kent and all remaining assembly members,

  I am sure that it would be a good exercise in humility and show
real interest if Esther, Mike, Joe, and the ICANN BOard member
gang folded and sealed these envelopes themselves.  You might want
to volunteer Kent to help them out yourself.  Take Dave Crocker
along with you, I am sure he is more than willing to help out
as well.  >;)

Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Fri, May 26, 2000 at 08:40:43PM +0200, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> > Mikael,
> >
> > >Did you apply for ICANN membership?
> > >Are you still waiting for the PINs?
> > >
> > >So did I, but thanks to Esther Dyson I can tell you that they're being
> > >sent this week.  To save money, ICANN is sending them in bulk, all at
> > once
> > >(at least the applications so far).
> >
> > Thanks for the info.
> >
> > BTW, personally I found that to save money on several thousand stamps is
> > , at the end, a rather wise decision. In particular considering that
> > there was no pressure to have them out earlier, was it?
>
> According to Andrew M. in a message to the MITF, there were over 16000
> applications for membership.  That's a lot of letters to fold, put into
> envelops, and send out.
>
> >
> > Regards
> > Roberto
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
> [email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 07:49:15 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Fwd FYI: Single Letter Domains

I got the following interesting notice.

He originally sent the note to GA, but since he is not a member, it bounced.
I'll CC my reply.

                            Harald

>X-Sender: [email-masked]
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
>Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:15:03 -0700
>To: [email-masked]
>From: John Kaufman <[email-masked]>
>Subject: Single Letter Domains
>Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
>
>Dear Mr. Alvestrand and the DNSO Members of the ICANN Board:
>
>I have been directed to you by Mr. Michael Roberts, CEO of ICANN, 
>regarding a change in the policy treatment of single-letter domains (e.g., 
>the sale of said domains to the general public).
>
>After reviewing the charters, by-laws and other documents of both ICANN 
>and IANA, I see no precedent that would stand a legal test that would deny 
>the sale of single-letter domains to the general public. Nor do I see a 
>precedent that would stand a legal test that would disallow the sale of 
>single-letter domains to the public. If I have missed such a precedent, 
>please so advise.
>
>Therefore, I would like to propose that the Names Council of the DNSO, as 
>a supporting organization of ICANN with respect to policy issues related 
>to the Domain Name System, propose to ICANN that the pre-existing IANA 
>policy barring the sale of single-letter domains now being continued under 
>ICANN management be struck down and, at the same time, that the domain 
>"k.com" be the first such domain to be sold under the new policy to the 
>undersigned.
>
>Please be advised that, in the interest of the general public, I may issue 
>a press statement next week to the effect that a change in this policy has 
>been requested.
>
>Thank you very much.
>
>John C. Kaufman
>President
>Kaufman Communications
>San Francisco, CA

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[email-masked]

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 08:13:14 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Single Letter Domains

Dear mr. Kaufman:

These are my particular responses to the issues you raise, and have no 
particular weight; I have asked you before to join the GA list if you want 
to participate in a discussion about them.

You raise two interesting points in your message:

1) Should single letter domains be delegated under .com, .net and .org?
2) If they should be delegated, who should be the recipient of the delegation?

The first question then leads to the third question:

3) Who decides what domains to delegate under a top level domain?

We have multiple conflicting precedents on this question:

- - The NSI decision not to delegate domain names containing the "network seven"
   was dropped recently, after a period where NSI as a registry permitted it,
   even while NSI the registrar did not.

- - The attempt to sell .com names ending in a dash was stopped after an ICANN
   decision was made that such names were not within the specifications

On the question of single letter domains, there are precedents on this in 
other contexts; the .dk domain allows them, the .no domain does not, for 
instance. So clearly this has been decided in the past on a per-domain basis.

There is as far as I know no precedent for requiring a registy to register 
a name at all. While the trend recently has been that many registries will 
be happy to sell any name you want to buy, many (like .se, .gov or .int) 
are operated under far more restrictive rules. Again, on a per domain basis.
I thus have a problem seeing the precedent for forcing the sale of "k.com", 
given that the policy in place is not being unfairly applied - nobody can 
get it.

All that said, I don't see at the moment any particular reason for 
escrowing those 26 domains in .com - your request for a change of policy 
may have merit, if we can figure out who has the responsibility to change 
that policy.

On the question of who gets the domain, I am far less uncertain: If a 
policy change is decided, there must be a fair method of allocating the 
domains.
"First-come-first-served" has served us well in the past, but in this 
instance, it is likely to be decided on sub-millisecond timing, given the 
number of people who will take an interest.

A more explicit form of lottery will probably seem fairer in this 
particular case.

My thoughts.

                       Harald T. Alvestrand

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[email-masked]

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 08:51:35 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [Admin] Suspension of posting rights for Jeff Williams

Since mr. Williams does not show any sign of understanding what the rules 
outlawing slander on the GA list mean, I hereby suspend his posting 
privilleges for 8 weeks - from today, May 27, 2000, until Saturday, July 
22, 2000.

Decisions of the GA list monitor can be appealed to the GA chair.

                          Harald T. Alvestrand
                            GA list monitor

>Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:05:19 -0700
>From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
>Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win95; U; 16bit)
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: [ga] Re: [IFWP] PCCF to close for the Summer
>Sender: [email-masked]
>
>Joe and all remaining assembly members,
>
>   As I lived in Japan for some time, and am especially familier with
>Yokohama and the availability of sexual pleasure activities, I am sure that
>*** has already made his arrangements.

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[email-masked]

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 01:50:11 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Fwd FYI: Single Letter Domains

Harald, Mr Kaufman and all remaining assembly members,

  Mr. Kaufman, to direct your concern to this body (DNSO) as suggested
by Mike Roberts, is in essence a basic "Run Around" that has been noticed
and with respect to single letter domain names.  One such instance was
the E.Com domain which was properly registered than denied or
stolen by Register.com, and than again denied as a proper Domain Name
by ICANN through one Louis Touton a member of the ICANN board.

  Further information on this incident can be found in the archives of the
Domain Policy mailing list as well as some posts on the DNSO GA list.
http://lists.internic.net and http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
respectively.  Mike Roberts is well known for sending folks down
"Rat Holes" such as he seem obviously doing to you here IMHO.

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> I got the following interesting notice.
>
> He originally sent the note to GA, but since he is not a member, it bounced.
> I'll CC my reply.
>
>                             Harald
>
> >X-Sender: [email-masked]
> >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
> >Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:15:03 -0700
> >To: [email-masked]
> >From: John Kaufman <[email-masked]>
> >Subject: Single Letter Domains
> >Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
> >
> >Dear Mr. Alvestrand and the DNSO Members of the ICANN Board:
> >
> >I have been directed to you by Mr. Michael Roberts, CEO of ICANN,
> >regarding a change in the policy treatment of single-letter domains (e.g.,
> >the sale of said domains to the general public).
> >
> >After reviewing the charters, by-laws and other documents of both ICANN
> >and IANA, I see no precedent that would stand a legal test that would deny
> >the sale of single-letter domains to the general public. Nor do I see a
> >precedent that would stand a legal test that would disallow the sale of
> >single-letter domains to the public. If I have missed such a precedent,
> >please so advise.
> >
> >Therefore, I would like to propose that the Names Council of the DNSO, as
> >a supporting organization of ICANN with respect to policy issues related
> >to the Domain Name System, propose to ICANN that the pre-existing IANA
> >policy barring the sale of single-letter domains now being continued under
> >ICANN management be struck down and, at the same time, that the domain
> >"k.com" be the first such domain to be sold under the new policy to the
> >undersigned.
> >
> >Please be advised that, in the interest of the general public, I may issue
> >a press statement next week to the effect that a change in this policy has
> >been requested.
> >
> >Thank you very much.
> >
> >John C. Kaufman
> >President
> >Kaufman Communications
> >San Francisco, CA
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> [email-masked]
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 03:05:45 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [Admin] Suspension of posting rights for Jeff Williams

Harald,

  What slander are you refering to.  I see no slander in my post.  I only
make a potential suggestion.  That is not slander.  If it were than sure me...

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> Since mr. Williams does not show any sign of understanding what the rules
> outlawing slander on the GA list mean, I hereby suspend his posting
> privilleges for 8 weeks - from today, May 27, 2000, until Saturday, July
> 22, 2000.
>
> Decisions of the GA list monitor can be appealed to the GA chair.
>
>                           Harald T. Alvestrand
>                             GA list monitor
>
> >Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:05:19 -0700
> >From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
> >Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
> >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win95; U; 16bit)
> >To: [email-masked]
> >Subject: [ga] Re: [IFWP] PCCF to close for the Summer
> >Sender: [email-masked]
> >
> >Joe and all remaining assembly members,
> >
> >   As I lived in Japan for some time, and am especially familier with
> >Yokohama and the availability of sexual pleasure activities, I am sure that
> >*** has already made his arrangements.
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> [email-masked]
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 12:50:22 +0200 (MET DST)
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Yokohama

Joop wrote:
>
>And then you will find that if you don't belong to the NCDNHC, your
>application is a waste of time.
>see www.icann.salzburgseminar.org/guidelines.htm
>

I'm not really sure about this.
Salzburg Seminar is one organization that is directing funds to allow 
participation in person to the ICANN meetings to people that otherwise 
could not afford it.

If they find meaningful applications that would not fit with their rules
, I am sure that they could at least provide alternate suggestions, or 
indications to other sponsors, or otherwise keep the ball rolling.

The real point is this one: "meaningful".
The waste of time is do discuss out-of-order things, send messages that 
contain offensive statements, and so on.
The re-opening of the debate on the role of individuals in the DNSO is a
 really meaningful subject, where Joop can provide experience and 
insight that will be a pity not to utilise in Yokohama.

The point is: are we willing to discuss this subject, in light of the 
recent evolution (first of all, the future implementation of the ICANN 
Membership), leaving out of the door the polemics that in the past 
disrupted this debate? Will we all be able to address this subject 
forgetting (or at least leaving in the background) the personality clash
 that made the previous effort abort?
If the answer is "No", the application is a waste of time, I agree.
If the answer is "Yes", I am sure that either the Salzburg Seminar or 
other sponsors will be happy to provide funding for allowing this 
important and controversial issue to be discussed.

And, to be proactive, I will get the ball rolling on this subject in my 
next posting.

Regards
Roberto
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 13:01:18 +0200 (MET DST)
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Individuals

Hi.

How does the GA-list see the question of participation of individuals to
 the DNSO?

In particular, what will be the role of individuals that do not belong 
to any constituency?

Should there be a difference in Individual Domain Name Holders and plain
 Users of the Net?
Note that the current policy of the NCDNHC is not to accept as members 
individuals that have a Domain Name and even a Web site if they only use
 it for personal/family purposes, not under the "umbrella" of an 
official Organization (I guess that it is the effort of avoiding abuses,
 like big bosses of commercial companies getting voting rights a holders
 of a family Web site).

What is the relationship possible between the Individuals active in the 
DNSO and the ICANN AtLarge Membership?

Should the Individuals (only Domain Name Holders, or every individual 
Netizen?) form a Constituency, or just operate in the DNSO General 
Assembly?

Should this issue be discussed further, and brought to Yokohama (or 
anyhow to ICANN's attention)?

Regards
Roberto
Regards
Roberto
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 10:24:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: [ga-full] Individuals

Here are my personal views.

Individuals do not belong in the NCDHC. My interests as an individual
academic are at times radically different from the institutional interests
of my non-commercial academic employer.  

On Sat, 27 May 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> How does the GA-list see the question of participation of individuals to
>  the DNSO?
> 
> In particular, what will be the role of individuals that do not belong 
> to any constituency?
> 

Currently they are under-represented.  I don't see the at large election
making any effort to privilege the un-represented class in nominations or
voting, so I expect this will continue.  

> Should there be a difference in Individual Domain Name Holders and plain
>  Users of the Net?

Their interests are similar but not identical.  I'd like to hear more on
this subject.

> Note that the current policy of the NCDNHC is not to accept as members 
> individuals that have a Domain Name and even a Web site if they only use
>  it for personal/family purposes, not under the "umbrella" of an 
> official Organization (I guess that it is the effort of avoiding abuses,
>  like big bosses of commercial companies getting voting rights a holders
>  of a family Web site).
> 

Although this policy excludes me, I believe it to be sound.

> What is the relationship possible between the Individuals active in the 
> DNSO and the ICANN AtLarge Membership?
> 

Individuals probably require their own constituency in the DNSO.   Perhaps
one for each region? ;>

> Should the Individuals (only Domain Name Holders, or every individual 
> Netizen?) form a Constituency, or just operate in the DNSO General 
> Assembly?
> 

At some point it will be appropriate to suggest that the GA is a failed
experiment.  I am willing to give it another three to six months, tops.
 
> Should this issue be discussed further, and brought to Yokohama (or 
> anyhow to ICANN's attention)?
> 

It's clear that ICANN will not act on what it doesn't want to see.  The
IDNO proposal, for all its faults, never got formally considered.  David
Post and I wrote a letter about an important aspect of the UDRP requesting
Board attention which was ignored.  Not much point going to ICANN unless
staff gatekeepers tell you they favor the plan or you have a Board member
who will push very hard.

- -- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                        -->It's hot here.<--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 07:40:29 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [ga-full] Individuals

At 10:24 AM 5/27/00 -0400, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
>On Sat, 27 May 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> > Should there be a difference in Individual Domain Name Holders and plain
> >  Users of the Net?
>
>Their interests are similar but not identical.  I'd like to hear more on
>this subject.

In what way do their interests differ?

> > What is the relationship possible between the Individuals active in the
> > DNSO and the ICANN AtLarge Membership?
> >
>
>Individuals probably require their own constituency in the DNSO.   Perhaps
>one for each region? ;>

This statement suggests goes down the path that leads to claiming that 
there is a constituency for every label, category or type that can be 
imagined.  While the academic exercise of looking for discernible labels 
might be interesting, it is not a useful way to find and create meaningful 
constituency categories.  The practise should be to first understand what 
differences motivate a category.

> > Should this issue be discussed further, and brought to Yokohama (or
> > anyhow to ICANN's attention)?
>
>It's clear that ICANN will not act on what it doesn't want to see.  The

So now you profess to know the nature and practise of the combines psyches 
of ICANN board members?  That's going just a bit far, don't you think?

>IDNO proposal, for all its faults, never got formally considered.  David

There was nothing to consider.  It was a group entirely without relevant 
content.

d/

=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker  <[email-masked]>
Brandenburg Consulting  <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253,  Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 15:04:50 GMT
From: "Mark Measday" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [Admin] Suspension of posting rights for Jeff Williams

Harald,

I haven't read Mr William's original post, so don't know what he said other 
than the below. A couple of procedural points:

(i) It was my understanding that suspension from the list is subsequent to a 
complaint. Then it is up to the list monitor to take action if deemed 
necessary. Did someone complain?
(ii) Slander may or may not be a crimial offence in various different 
jurisdictions. Similarly the mischievious allegation of slander may or may 
not be actionable in the same manner. Is there proof of slander? If not, you 
are playing into the hands of your detractors. List etiquette and law should 
be separate.
(iii) The penalty for misbehaviour on the list was deeemed to be two weeks 
suspension in previous list corespondence. How is eight weeks justified? You 
would seem to be exceeding the brief.
(iv) It would appear that, were Mr Williams to hire a competent advocate, 
you would be putting other list members at considerable risk.

>From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: [ga] [Admin] Suspension of posting rights for Jeff Williams
>Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 08:51:35 +0200
>
>Since mr. Williams does not show any sign of understanding what the rules
>outlawing slander on the GA list mean, I hereby suspend his posting
>privilleges for 8 weeks - from today, May 27, 2000, until Saturday, July
>22, 2000.
>
>Decisions of the GA list monitor can be appealed to the GA chair.
>
>                          Harald T. Alvestrand
>                            GA list monitor
>
>
>>Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:05:19 -0700
>>From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
>>Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
>>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win95; U; 16bit)
>>To: [email-masked]
>>Subject: [ga] Re: [IFWP] PCCF to close for the Summer
>>Sender: [email-masked]
>>
>>Joe and all remaining assembly members,
>>
>>   As I lived in Japan for some time, and am especially familier with
>>Yokohama and the availability of sexual pleasure activities, I am sure 
>>that
>>*** has already made his arrangements.
>
>--
>Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
>[email-masked]
>
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 08:08:20 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Re: [ga-full] Individuals

Hello Dave,

Saturday, May 27, 2000, 7:40:29 AM, you wrote:

>>Individuals probably require their own constituency in the DNSO.   Perhaps
>>one for each region? ;>

DC> This statement suggests goes down the path that leads to claiming that 
DC> there is a constituency for every label, category or type that can be 
DC> imagined.  While the academic exercise of looking for discernible labels 
DC> might be interesting, it is not a useful way to find and create meaningful 
DC> constituency categories.  The practise should be to first understand what 
DC> differences motivate a category.

Sorry, Dave, but the DNSO has already set a precedent for this.  After
all we have both a Business/Commercial Constituency, and a
Trademark/IP Constituency, which greatly overlap, with one being
nothing more than a subset of the other.

DC> So now you profess to know the nature and practise of the combines psyches
DC> of ICANN board members?  That's going just a bit far, don't you think?

History speaks for itself, Dave.  The ICANN Board has a clear bias
against an individual's constituency. This is well known and
documented.

>>IDNO proposal, for all its faults, never got formally considered.  David

DC> There was nothing to consider.  It was a group entirely without relevant 
DC> content.

On this, we agree. But like ICANN did with other constituency
proposals, it could have taken the proposal and come up with its own
charter for such a constituency.  It didn't.

It should have.

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[email-masked]

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 08:24:28 -0700
From: "Michael F. McNulty" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Single Letter Domains

An auction would truly help everyone to appreciate the value and
scarcity of the domain space, at least as currently configured.
Michael McNulty

- ------------------------------------------------------------------

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> Dear mr. Kaufman:
>
> These are my particular responses to the issues you raise, and have no
> particular weight; I have asked you before to join the GA list if you want
> to participate in a discussion about them.
>
> You raise two interesting points in your message:
>
> 1) Should single letter domains be delegated under .com, .net and .org?
> 2) If they should be delegated, who should be the recipient of the delegation?
>
> The first question then leads to the third question:
>
> 3) Who decides what domains to delegate under a top level domain?
>
> We have multiple conflicting precedents on this question:
>
> - The NSI decision not to delegate domain names containing the "network seven"
>    was dropped recently, after a period where NSI as a registry permitted it,
>    even while NSI the registrar did not.
>
> - The attempt to sell .com names ending in a dash was stopped after an ICANN
>    decision was made that such names were not within the specifications
>
> On the question of single letter domains, there are precedents on this in
> other contexts; the .dk domain allows them, the .no domain does not, for
> instance. So clearly this has been decided in the past on a per-domain basis.
>
> There is as far as I know no precedent for requiring a registy to register
> a name at all. While the trend recently has been that many registries will
> be happy to sell any name you want to buy, many (like .se, .gov or .int)
> are operated under far more restrictive rules. Again, on a per domain basis.
> I thus have a problem seeing the precedent for forcing the sale of "k.com",
> given that the policy in place is not being unfairly applied - nobody can
> get it.
>
> All that said, I don't see at the moment any particular reason for
> escrowing those 26 domains in .com - your request for a change of policy
> may have merit, if we can figure out who has the responsibility to change
> that policy.
>
> On the question of who gets the domain, I am far less uncertain: If a
> policy change is decided, there must be a fair method of allocating the
> domains.
> "First-come-first-served" has served us well in the past, but in this
> instance, it is likely to be decided on sub-millisecond timing, given the
> number of people who will take an interest.
>
> A more explicit form of lottery will probably seem fairer in this
> particular case.
>
> My thoughts.
>
>                        Harald T. Alvestrand
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> [email-masked]
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #74
***********************