Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1092
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Tuesday, March 19 2002           Volume 01 : Number 1092

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

Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 00:28:43 -0500
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FW: Notice# 001 grassroots nine seat challenge

FYI

- -----Original Message-----
From: Joanna Lane [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 12:27 AM
To: Stephen Waters; Marc Schneiders
Cc: William S. Lovell; At Large Forum
Subject: Notice# 001 grassroots nine seat challenge

The Suggestion by Stephen Waters for the At Large Membership to hold
elections for 9 Directors,  first noted on the At Large forum mailing list,
has now been posted to the Best Practices section of the Icannatlarge.com
Forum under "Notice # 001. Grass roots nine seat challenge".
http://www.icannatlarge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=90.

If further expressions of interest are received, (a simple yes or no will do
at this stage), a Call to Action will be issued in consultation with Mr.
Waters, together with a schedule for discussion, debate, voting and so on.
In the absence of further interest, no Call to Action will be issued and the
matter will be dropped from the BP process. Please do not remove this Notice
# from the subject line of your reply.

Best Practices are available to assist the community in uncovering consensus
(or not) on an Issue. For a more detailed explanation, please go to:-
http://www.cerebalaw.com/BPIial.htm
http://www.cerebalaw.com/BPIIial.pdf
http://www.cerebalaw.com/BPIIIial.htm
http://www.cerebalaw.com/BPIVial.htm

Regards,
Joanna

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Stephen Waters
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 11:12 AM
To: At Large Forum
Subject: [ALSC-Forum] grassroots nine seat challenge

Idea: Why don't we simply hold elections for all 9 seats? I'm sure any
refusal to seat them at the BoD meeting would look *real* nice on the
news. Perhaps a kind fellow or lady from the Commerce Department would
agree to accompany them as a gesture of goodwill?

I recognize that the situation is a little more complex than that, right
now, but just in case Lynn hasn't managed to screw up ICANN by then.

- -s

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Marc Schneiders
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:51 PM
To: Stephen Waters
Cc: At Large Forum; recipient list not shown:
Subject: Re: [ALSC-Forum] grassroots nine seat challenge

On 18 Mar 2002, at 10:12 [=GMT-0600], Stephen Waters wrote:

> Idea: Why don't we simply hold elections for all 9 seats? I'm sure any
> refusal to seat them at the BoD meeting would look *real* nice on the
> news. Perhaps a kind fellow or lady from the Commerce Department would
> agree to accompany them as a gesture of goodwill?
>
> I recognize that the situation is a little more complex than that, right
> now, but just in case Lynn hasn't managed to screw up ICANN by then.

I do not think this is a good idea. Confrontation is the _last_ option,
not the one we need now. But I agree that it should be kept open.

- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:39:16 +0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

Vint,

>
>I am not sure I can dig out the information from archives but the
>whole voting process was considered a one-shot effort, to be followed
>by evaluation, which has now been done. For privacy and convenience,
>ICANN committed to limiting the use of the voting mailing list to
>election matters only. The proposals from ALSC suggest a new structure
>for at-large participation and that is why the invitation has been
>issued. There is no direct connection between the one-shot voting
>subset of interested parties and the invitation to create a new
>at-large structure.
>

I am not sure that there was consensus on the at-large election to be a 
bird-of-a-feather. There were at that time different points of view, and 
even if it had been stated from the beginning that an evaluation phase would 
have followed, there was substantial disagreement on the scope of the 
evaluation, which large parts of the Internet community considered as a mean 
for improving through learning by mistakes, considering that the concept of 
the at-large was not negotiable.

However, the problem, IMHO, lies now on the fact that, while the initial 
at-large election has been an overwhelming success, beyond the more 
optimistic (or pessimistic?!?) expectations, the participation to the 
current phase does not reach even a fraction of the numbers involved in the 
election.
You might remember that at an ICANN meeting (I think it was Yokohama, but I 
may be wrong) I raised the issue of what to do after the election with the 
at-large members, and the need to keep the momentum going, avoiding 
forgetting about the electorate until time for new elections. This is 
unfortunately exactly what happened.

Learning from past mistakes, I would therefore suggest that our effort be 
directed this time not only towards the mechanism of electing another set of 
Directors, but mainly towards building a permanent structure to coordinate 
users input in the process. Otherwise we will spend a lot of energies to go 
through a new round of election, but the situation will not substantially 
change, because the new At-Large Directors would not have any means to 
convey the users expectations and needs to the Board, and will therefore act 
in isolation from the body that elected them.

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:47:13 +0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [admin] Attacks and offensive words

John,

>
>I agree with Eric on this. Stifling debate is a big part of what you do 
>when
>you want to shut out the people from having a say in the decision making
>process. You are wrong to criticize Eric for his post - he was making a
>valid, on-topic post. As for calling names,  "if the shoe fits...". Also,
>some strong language sometimes serves to wake folks up and get their
>attention.
>

Your post would be entirely appropriate if we were discussing the way to set 
up rules of behaviour.
This is not the case now: rules have been discussed, voted, approved, and we 
are now in the enforcement phase.

If I may use an example, smoking is now forbidden on aircrafts. You may 
argue whether this is censoring your rights to smoke, or if this is needed 
to protect the rights of others not to inhale your smoke, but the fact is 
that if you are caught smoking you are fined.
Exactly this is happening to who violates the posting rules in quantity 
(number of posts) or quality (civil discourse).

Best regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:20:55 +0100
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

On 2002-03-19 01:49:21 +0100, Marc Schneiders wrote:

>>(And yes, it's registered with NSI.  There's no need to comment 
>>on that.)

>Then there is no need to state that either.

Since we are talking about Verisign registrar's behaviour, and I was 
giving it as an example which indicates that Verisign at least has 
not removed expiration dates from _all_ domains, the information was 
kind of necessary.  A Tucows-registered domain which still has an 
expiration date would have been irrelevant.

- -- 
Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:18:28 +0100
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

On 2002-03-19 07:39:16 +0000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

>You might remember that at an ICANN meeting (I think it was
>Yokohama, but I may be wrong) I raised the issue of what to do 
>after the election with the at-large members, and the need to keep 
>the momentum going, avoiding forgetting about the electorate until 
>time for new elections. This is unfortunately exactly what 
>happened.

In fact, even the simplest "networking" efforts were not supported 
by ICANN: Back then, I had started the icann-europe mailing list 
(which is kind of dead by now, but was quite alive back then).  I 
tried for more than half a year (and with countless e-mails) to 
convince ICANN staff to add a link to that mailing list's web site 
to one of their link pages. I wrote to Esther who was the chairman 
of the board back then, and she agreed that it would be a good idea, 
and told staff.

The person in charge of the elections back then (sorry, I forgot the 
name) even told me she was working on an FAQ on that. The last thing 
I heard (several months after the exchange of e-mails with Esther) 
was that the FAQ couldn't be put online because there was nothing on 
the Asian and African regions so far (or something like that), and 
it could only be put online in its entirety.

No such FAQ was ever put up, to the best of my knowledge.  Now, 
guess what kind of message that kind of behaviour sent.

- -- 
Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:43:32 +0100
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FYI: "Overcoming ICANN"

This was just forwarded by Jay Fenello to the CSIF list: Dave 
Farber, Peter G. Neumann, and Lauren Weinstein have published an 
Open Letter to the Global Internet Community, entitled "Overcoming 
ICANN: Forging Better Paths for the Internet."

The letter is available at <http://www.pfir.org/statements/icann>,
and required reading - in its entirety.

Some tasty bits:

 - "ICANN's lack of meaningful representation, and its continuing 
   pattern of drastic and seemingly arbitrary structural and policy 
   changes (among other shortcomings), have created an unstable and 
   suspicion-ridden environment that is detrimental to the interests 
   of the vast majority of Internet users around the world. The 
   resulting overly politicized situation not only threatens the 
   stability of the Internet itself, but also invites drastic and 
   undesirable interventions by a variety of vested interests."

 - "Wide consensus has already been achieved on at least one key 
   point -- even by ICANN's current president -- ICANN is seriously 
   broken. We agree, and we additionally assert that ICANN's history, 
   structure, and behaviors strongly indicate that the most 
   productive course would be for ICANN's role in Internet affairs to 
   be discontinued."

As a cure to the problems in ICANN, the authors suggest: (1) "all 
Internet policy, operational, and other [...] functions currently 
performed by ICANN should be transferred", as soon as practicable, 
to some other organization such as the IAB as a transitional 
measure.  (2) A study be started "with a mandate to propose detailed 
and meaningful paths for the Internet's development".  (3) Results 
of that study should be carefully considered and implemented.

This statement is certainly demonstrating that public distrust in 
ICANN's board, and ICANN as a whole, has reached a new climax after 
the Lynn proposal and the Accra decisions.  To me, it seems 
unreasonable to believe that any kind of trust in the ICANN board 
could be restored by either keeping the current directors, or 
selecting new ones in a circular nomination committee approach.  In 
fact, this approach would perpetuate current distrust.

Quite frankly, I do not see any other way to re-establish trust in 
this board than replacing a considerable number of directors (like 
those whose terms expire later this year) by way of public elections 
 - whatever be the mechanism used for these elections.  And even that 
doesn't have to work.

- -- 
Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 22:46:02 +1200
From: DPF <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: "Overcoming ICANN"

On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:43:32 +0100, Thomas Roessler
<[email-masked]> wrote:
(in fact Dave Farber and co wrote)
> - "Wide consensus has already been achieved on at least one key 
>   point -- even by ICANN's current president -- ICANN is seriously 
>   broken. We agree, and we additionally assert that ICANN's history, 
>   structure, and behaviors strongly indicate that the most 
>   productive course would be for ICANN's role in Internet affairs to 
>   be discontinued."

I reluctantly came to the same conclusion as the esteemed Mr Farber
the day the Board voted to kill the at large (which is what they did).
Farber and co have expressed most eloquently why ICANN no longer has a
mandate to perform its role.  This is a great pity as it will take
some time to find a successor but that is the most productive thing we
can now do.

ICANN now has such a history and culture of non-transparency, secrecy,
distrust and reneging that any attempts at reform are to be honest
doomed to failure.  One would have to replace the majority of the
Board and the senior management to even come close to having faith in
ICANN's ability to manage the naming and addressing systems.  Major
stakeholders such as the RIRs, the ccTLDs, IETF are all re-addressing
their relationship with ICANN.

There can be no question in my mind that ICANN has failed to not only
live up to its founding principles but is in flagrant breach of the
agreement with DOC and the White Paper.

Therefore it is time as Mr Farber says to turn our energies to
devising the best successor or successors to ICANN.  This need not be
complicated as the RIRs and ccTLDs are pretty much self managing and
some structure is already in place for gTLD issues.  

Let us walk away from ICANN as a noble but failed experiment and work
towards a replacement which can apply to DOC to take up the challenge
which ICANN management has passed off as too hard.

Therefore I call upon interested persons to step forward with offers
of help for two things:

1) Hosting a petition site for members of the Internet Community to
sign up to support the redelegation away from ICANN of all naming and
addressing responsibilities

2) Hosting of mailing lists and or forums to create a replacement or
replacements for ICANN

Originally I planned to work quietly with a few people on the issue of
proposing a replacement organisation to ICANN, but as so many people
are now publicly endorsing that ICANN should lose its right to manage
the naming and addressing system it seems timely to step forward and
add my voice in support.

DPF
- --
[email-masked]
ICQ 29964527
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:16:09 +0100
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

Dear Kristy,
may be the real reason why the ICANN does not release the @large list is to 
be found somewhere else. From what I gather election.com came across their 
worst nightmare ever with their 50% discounted 2000 @large election. The 
information provided by the ICANN was a mess and they - say the hearsay - 
never addressed properly the requests from election.com.

1. as we have no reason to suspect that the Staff is not serious, we may 
deduct that the lists are beyond recovery and that releasing them would 
create a bigger scandal than not to release them. This may come from the 
unexpected number of @large registrations they did not addressed properly.

2. it is unlikely that election.com would accept to discount anything to 
the ICANN, doubling the budget planned by the Staff.

3. it is likely that the exposure given by Lynn's scheme to the ICANN and 
to the possible @large election would lead to far more than the ALSC 5.000 
target. If you fear 150.000 again at $1 for election.com and may-be at 
$1.5/$ 2 for collection, mailing and management, this is a too large a cost.

In that perspective, what I suggest from the begining seems to be 
expectable. That everyone registered on one of the ICANN gouvernance 
mailing lists (ASO - PSO, ISOC, W3C, PSO, GA, ALSC) make the @large. This 
is Esther's initiative: 600 to 2000 people on Joop's list. This permits the 
BoD to decide in Shangai to use this list for a quick election:
- - no commitment on future yet a real election
- - no risk of vote capture
- - no identification needed
- - no protestation - those who could protest would vote
- - anough balancing between activits and techies
- - a very short campaign preventing mad schemes to develop
- - a continuation for the board squatters

An easier solution would even be a statu quo referendum for consensus by 
Joop's list.

It is also a good reason why my proposition to seriously structure the 
@large on a Local Internet Community basis is dangerous. This would give 
real weight to the @large, to the ccTLDs and to the Govs (together with the 
ccTLDs). Today the game is to make believe the Govs could support the 
ICANN. If they were supportingthei @large, it would kill the scheme.

Jefsey

On 16:41 18/03/02, Kristy McKee said:
>Vint, I appreciate you taking the time to write; however you have added 
>nothing to our conversation and have not even attempted to answer the 
>question asked.
>
>Only your private little group believes the At Large was a one time 
>thing.  No one in the general public has that understanding.
>
>I do understand the ICANN staff, like the board members are technically 
>challenged, especially in terms of handling databases.
>
>Perhaps you could reach inside yourself and provide us with a truthful 
>response.
>
>Thanks,
>
>~k
>
>At 10:32 AM 3/18/2002 -0500, vint cerf wrote:
>>no I can't because the board's view was that elections were infeasible
>>at the moment. The board is well aware of the problem of expiring board
>>seats and believes it must take an action at the next meeting or at
>>the latest, shanghai in october if these seats are to be preserved.
>>
>>vint
>>
>>At 09:03 AM 3/18/2002 -0800, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>> >Given that the ALSC recommendations included an election
>> >component, and given that the current AtLarge
>> >Directorships are expiring, can you give us any indication
>> >as to the proposed time frame for said election component
>> >to be announced?
>
>--
>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

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

Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 03:24:02 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [admin] Attacks and offensive words

Tuesday, Tuesday, March 19, 2002, 3:23:02 AM, Eric Dierker wrote:

> Your position is well noted as a debate stifler, control freak and censorship
> advocate.
> Only as you see how things should run should they run, great for a boss engineer
> bad for consensus.

No, Eric, it is how the GA said things should run, as we voted on.

The rules are simple, and they are fair.  As to how they are
implemented, that is something that could be open to debate, but the
current action was called for, and justified.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:04:14 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: "Overcoming ICANN"

> 
>  - "Wide consensus has already been achieved on at least one key
>    point -- even by ICANN's current president -- ICANN is seriously
>    broken. We agree, and we additionally assert that ICANN's history,
>    structure, and behaviors strongly indicate that the most
>    productive course would be for ICANN's role in Internet affairs to
>    be discontinued."

Since Stuart Lynn has admitted that ICANN is broken and
seriously flawed, I guess he also means that the UDRP and
all other "policies" instituted by ICANN are equally
defective and ought to be discarded. Is that not correct,
Mr. Lynn?

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:06:31 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

I agree, a full timer is necessary.  But I don't agree
with _your_ choosing of that person Mz. Dyson.  I don't
think that person ought to be appointed, they should be
elected.

Esther Dyson wrote:
> 
> hence, my suggestion for a *fulltime* person in charge of precisely such
> (or precisely such that were missing!) coordination efforts!
> 
> DO I hear some support here?

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:10:36 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: "Overcoming ICANN"

DPF wrote:

> Let us walk away from ICANN as a noble but failed experiment and work
> towards a replacement which can apply to DOC to take up the challenge
> which ICANN management has passed off as too hard.
> 
> Therefore I call upon interested persons to step forward with offers
> of help for two things:
> 
> 1) Hosting a petition site for members of the Internet Community to
> sign up to support the redelegation away from ICANN of all naming and
> addressing responsibilities
> 
> 2) Hosting of mailing lists and or forums to create a replacement or
> replacements for ICANN

I would be only too happy to host the petition site,
mailing list(s), and/or forum(s) David.  Let's coordinate
and get this rolling. 

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:19:53 -0600
From: "John Palmer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [admin] Attacks and offensive words

I have obtained the domain dns-o.org and will offer to run
an e-mail list if the censorship gets too out of hand here.

The rules are being used to stifle legitimate debate.  We
can get around that, however.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 1:47 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [admin] Attacks and offensive words

> John,
>
> >
> >I agree with Eric on this. Stifling debate is a big part of what you do
> >when
> >you want to shut out the people from having a say in the decision making
> >process. You are wrong to criticize Eric for his post - he was making a
> >valid, on-topic post. As for calling names,  "if the shoe fits...". Also,
> >some strong language sometimes serves to wake folks up and get their
> >attention.
> >
>
> Your post would be entirely appropriate if we were discussing the way to
set
> up rules of behaviour.
> This is not the case now: rules have been discussed, voted, approved, and
we
> are now in the enforcement phase.
>
> If I may use an example, smoking is now forbidden on aircrafts. You may
> argue whether this is censoring your rights to smoke, or if this is needed
> to protect the rights of others not to inhale your smoke, but the fact is
> that if you are caught smoking you are fined.
> Exactly this is happening to who violates the posting rules in quantity
> (number of posts) or quality (civil discourse).
>
> Best regards
> Roberto
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 05:25:12 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

Tuesday, Tuesday, March 19, 2002, 8:06:31 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> I agree, a full timer is necessary.  But I don't agree
> with _your_ choosing of that person Mz. Dyson.  I don't
> think that person ought to be appointed, they should be
> elected.

Kinda like how Joop was elected?

It was ok when Pindar and the others selected him to spearhead that
when it was their money, but no OK for Esther to do the same with
hers?

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:41:55 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

William X Walsh wrote:
> 
> Tuesday, Tuesday, March 19, 2002, 8:06:31 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> 
> > I agree, a full timer is necessary.  But I don't agree
> > with _your_ choosing of that person Mz. Dyson.  I don't
> > think that person ought to be appointed, they should be
> > elected.
> 
> Kinda like how Joop was elected?

I see nothing has changed with you, you're still on a Joop
bashing bender which makes it personal and NOT
professional in the least.  I said I would not be
responding to your barbs anymore but this one mail is the
singular exception.  

As you are no doubt aware, there was no membership at the
time of Joop's selection by Pindar.  Joop was appointed in
a bootstrap effort of a non-extant organization just
getting under way.  Furthermore, Joop has repeatedly
stressed and stated his complete willingness to step down
from his position as Webmaster (as that is ALL his
position amounts to), as soon as his successor is
elected.  Which fact you seem to consistently ignore.  

Your continued taunts against Joop are out of place and
inappropriate in these fora.  Go back to your "sabotage
the IDNO" project and rail away all you please on that
list, but leave these lists free of your clutter as you've
nothing constructive to offer by making these kinds of
posts.

I will not respond to any response you might make to this
posting as I've nothing more o say to you on this wise.  

> 
> It was ok when Pindar and the others selected him to spearhead that
> when it was their money, but no OK for Esther to do the same with
> hers?

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:43:11 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

I propose Joanna Lane.

And, you're welcome!

Esther Dyson wrote:
> 
> Please propose an alternative candidate.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> esther
> 
> At 11:06 AM 3/19/2002, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> >I agree, a full timer is necessary.  But I don't agree
> >with _your_ choosing of that person Mz. Dyson.  I don't
> >think that person ought to be appointed, they should be
> >elected.
> >
> >Esther Dyson wrote:
> > >
> > > hence, my suggestion for a *fulltime* person in charge of precisely such
> > > (or precisely such that were missing!) coordination efforts!
> > >
> > > DO I hear some support here?
> >
> >--
> >Sincerely,
> >
> >Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >         Hermes Network Inc.
> >         Toronto, Canada
> >
> >----
> >direct: 416.422.1034
> >
> >icq: 34564103
> 
> BACK TO THE FRONTIER - this year's PC FORUM with
> Craig Barrett, Rick Belluzzo, Eric Schmidt... and you!
> www.pcforum2002.com/pcforum/speakers.cfm
> March 24 to 26
> 
> Esther Dyson                    Always make new mistakes!
> chairman, EDventure Holdings
> writer, Release 3.0 (on Website below)
> [email-masked]
> 1 (212) 924-8800    --   fax  1 (212) 924-0240
> 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> New York, NY 10011 USA
> http://www.edventure.com

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 05:54:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ALSC-Forum] Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Esther Dyson wrote:

>
> Please propose an alternative candidate.

Esther - it should be clear to you by now that no one in the
community trusts you.  Your a two faced brown noser.  But look on the
bright side - ya got nice tits.

regards
joe baptista

http://www.dot-god.com/

>
> Thanks!
>
> esther
>
> At 11:06 AM 3/19/2002, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> >I agree, a full timer is necessary.  But I don't agree
> >with _your_ choosing of that person Mz. Dyson.  I don't
> >think that person ought to be appointed, they should be
> >elected.
> >
> >Esther Dyson wrote:
> > >
> > > hence, my suggestion for a *fulltime* person in charge of precisely such
> > > (or precisely such that were missing!) coordination efforts!
> > >
> > > DO I hear some support here?
> >
> >--
> >Sincerely,
> >
> >Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >         Hermes Network Inc.
> >         Toronto, Canada
> >
> >----
> >direct: 416.422.1034
> >
> >icq: 34564103
>
>
> BACK TO THE FRONTIER - this year's PC FORUM with
> Craig Barrett, Rick Belluzzo, Eric Schmidt... and you!
> www.pcforum2002.com/pcforum/speakers.cfm
> March 24 to 26
>
>
> Esther Dyson			Always make new mistakes!
> chairman, EDventure Holdings
> writer, Release 3.0 (on Website below)
> [email-masked]
> 1 (212) 924-8800    --   fax  1 (212) 924-0240
> 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> New York, NY 10011 USA
> http://www.edventure.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: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 06:04:19 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Substance over rhetoric - a constructive challenge

Tuesday, Tuesday, March 19, 2002, 8:41:55 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> William X Walsh wrote:
>> 
>> Tuesday, Tuesday, March 19, 2002, 8:06:31 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>> 
>> > I agree, a full timer is necessary.  But I don't agree
>> > with _your_ choosing of that person Mz. Dyson.  I don't
>> > think that person ought to be appointed, they should be
>> > elected.
>> 
>> Kinda like how Joop was elected?

> I see nothing has changed with you, you're still on a Joop
> bashing bender which makes it personal and NOT
> professional in the least.  I said I would not be

I was not bashing Joop, Sotiris.

I was bashing you, for your hypocrisy.  I didn't criticize Joop in
that post at all.  But nice attempt at dodging the real point, there.
I'm sure no one had a problem seeing it for what it was.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

- --
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 #1092
*************************