Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1135
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Sunday, April 21 2002           Volume 01 : Number 1135

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

Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 18:33:50 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue

Saturday, Saturday, April 20, 2002, 6:21:11 PM, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:

> [all cc's trimmed-either they read the list, or we can do without them]

> One difference is that there is no easy way to opt out, opt-in is
> prohibited by ICANN, and - most crucicially in the consumer context- the
> choices are not presented at sign-in.

Opt out of the BULK whois is permitted by ICANN, Michael.

There should not be any opt out of the public whois, however.

To use the spam argument to advocate for this is useless.  Removing
public whois would not in any way dampen the spam issue in any
measurable fashion.  I get more spam to addresses not listed in whois,
and most of the spam to addresses in whois are most likely from other
sources as well.

More spammers use web robots to go out and cull addresses from places
like the archives for this mailing list and other websites.

- -- 
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: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 18:36:09 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ITU & The great African internet robbery

This has nothing to do with the GA or ICANN.

Further, its a really lame argument.

If they don't want to receive emails from BT or AOL, then they should
configure their mail servers appropriate.

The way they describe it working, is the way it works worldwide, and
the way it should work.

Saturday, Saturday, April 20, 2002, 9:33:11 AM, [email-masked] wrote:

> Excerpt:  

> Africa is being ripped off - to the tune of some $500m a year - simply for 
> hooking up to the World Wide Web, say Kenyan internet company chiefs.   
> According to Kenya's Internet Service Providers (ISP) Association, the 
> continent is being forced by Western companies to pay the full cost of 
> connecting to worldwide networks. 

> Chairman Richard Bell says this has led to the unfair exploitation of the 
> continent's young internet industry.   He says the problem is that 
> International Telecommunications Union regulations - which ensures the costs 
> of telephone calls between Africa and the West are split 50:50 - are not 
> being enforced with regard to the internet. 

> "British Telecom doesn't spend one single penny... America Online doesn't 
> spend one single cent in sending emails to Africa."   The total cost of any 
> email sent or received by an African internet user is borne entirely by 
> African ISPs, Mr Bell said on the BBC African service programme Talkabout 
> Africa. 

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_1931000/1931120.stm
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- -- 
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: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 18:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

wow, we were just about to choose the icannatlarge for one of our regular
donations.

I would have lent some Alice's financial support...

thanks for illuminating a real issue.

- -rick

>
> You really should go check out the funding forum.
> http://www.icannatlarge.com/funding.php
> http://www.icannatlarge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=77
>
>
> So far he has submitted nearly $4000 in "costs" for his time.
>
> --
> 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
>

- --
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, 20 Apr 2002 20:53:35 -0500
From: Don Brown <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue

O.K.  Let's see.  If you have the license plate number, you can look
up the owner.  If you have the driver license number, you can look up
the owner.  If you have the property address, you can look up the
owner.  I'm not totally sure about SS number, but I wouldn't doubt if
a database is available on the net, as well.  If you have the phone
number, even in some cases where they have not opted in, in TX, you can
look up the owner.

Are we getting bundled up in our socks over the confidentiality of the
Registrant of a domain name?  Really?  Well, let's not.

Is this other information comparable to the available information
about the registrant of a domain name? Is the Pope Catholic? Of course
it is!  It is, indeed, the same kind of personal information one would
find about the owner of a license plate, driver license, etc.

However, my registration of a domain name is one heck of a lot more
trivial than my license plate, driver license, social security number
or the appraised value (yep, that's there, too) of my property.

I think some are hunting mosquitos with 00 buck shot rather than
living in the real world. There is no confidentially issue here which
will harelip the Governor, so let's move on.

Saturday, April 20, 2002, 6:26:27 PM, Cade,Marilyn S - LGA <[email-masked]> wrote:
CMSL> Jeff, do elaborate on the differences on what is listed in a "white pages" listing and WHOIS.

CMSL> In white pages, name, address and telephone number is the typical listing. [unless there is an opt out, or situation Jeff described for Texas which requires opt in]. 

CMSL> What is the difference with WHOIS listings?

CMSL> -----Original Message-----
CMSL> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:[email-masked]]
CMSL> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 8:25 PM
CMSL> To: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
CMSL> Cc: [email-masked]; Alexander Svensson; Dan Halloran; Louis Touton; Mike
CMSL> Palage; Antonio Harris; icann board address
CMSL> Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue

CMSL> Marilyn and all assembly members,

CMSL>   Your of course very welcome Marilyn.  It is very important that
CMSL> accurate information is decimated when making such comments
CMSL> or statements.

CMSL>   In any event comparisons of a phone # listing and private information
CMSL> listed in WHOIS data are not really comparable, and therefore making
CMSL> such comparisons is felonious at best.  Same of course is true with
CMSL> property ownership listings.  Apples and tomatoes...

CMSL> Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

>> Jeff, thanks for  providing more accurate information about a practice in one state at least.  I wasn't aware of that but I am sure that residents of Texas appreciate it!  Marilyn
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:[email-masked]]
>> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 3:28 PM
>> To: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
>> Cc: [email-masked]; Alexander Svensson; Dan Halloran; Louis Touton; Thomas
>> Roessler; Mike Palage; Antonio Harris
>> Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue
>>
>> Marilyn and all assembly members,
>>
>> Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:
>>
>> > For those who want to be "unlisted" in the telephone white pages listing in the U.S., they pay a special fee.
>>
>>   This statement is incorrect of course.  Some states, such as Texas where
>> I reside the situation is just the opposite.  If you wish your phone number
>> to be listed in the white pages than you pay and additional monthly charge
>> that will appear on your phone bill every month.  My personal Phone
>> # is NOT listed as I did not opt-in to have it listed.  You may check
>> the Frisco Texas White pages to see for yourself of course.
>>
>> > There is no counterpart that I am aware of in the "yellow pages" which is businesses, institutions, organizations, and even individuals who advertise, who hold themselves out to communicate with
>> the public through this medium.
>> >
>> > We really don't know at this  point FOR SURE how many registrants fit which category.  I strongly suspect that at least 80% of .com; .net; .org; .info; .biz are businesses, organizations,
>> institutions, or entities/individuals who are buying names and holding them for resale/warehousing.  It is unclear how many registrants are "individuals"  in generic TLDs or in ccTLDS [Some ccTLDs
>> don't accept ind. registration/others do].
>> >
>> > In any case, an analysis, even rough, of this breakdown would be useful information, even if estimated.
>> >
>> > The WHOIS TF co-chairs have asked the registrar/registry constituency representatives in the TF how they might provide even roughly responsive answers/statistics. This is a work in progress. Do
>> not read into this request that the registries and registrars have agreed to any kind of analysis, only that that the request has been made inside the TF.
>> >
>> > Any analysis, or statistics would be greatly appreciated by the WHOIS TF as a more than useful data point... (s).
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: William X Walsh [mailto:[email-masked]]
>> > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 6:29 AM
>> > To: William S. Lovell
>> > Cc: [email-masked]
>> > Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk Whois Data Issue
>> >
>> > Wednesday, Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 9:10:37 PM, William S. Lovell wrote:
>> >
>> > > Absurdity reaches new heights.  One can also keep one's name out of the
>> > > phone book by not having a phone, or out of the Motor Vehicle Department's
>> > > lists by having neither a driver's license nor a car. But both of those
>> > > entities
>> > > have procedures for protecting their user's privacy. The Internet, or indeed
>> > > a domain name, are rapidly becoming necessary parts of doing business, and
>> > > indeed a healthy means for self expression by private citizens. To
>> > > suggest that
>> > > one must necessarily give away all rights of privacy just because some
>> > > registrar
>> > > sees yet one more way to squeeze out a buck is unconscionable.
>> >
>> > Just as there are examples supporting your view, there are better
>> > ones supporting the opposite view.
>> >
>> > In the US, every state makes property ownership information available
>> > as a matter of public record.  They are required by statute to provide
>> > that information in bulk format for a fee, and there are companies out
>> > there who specialize in providing that data in a searchable and
>> > downloadable database format.
>> >
>> > You cannot own property without having it listed publicly.  If you
>> > want to own it and protect your privacy, it is entirely up to you to
>> > do what is necessary to do that, by forming a shell company for
>> > instance.
>> >
>> > Access to those databases are not expensive at all, as a matter of
>> > fact.
>> >
>> > When you own property, people have the right to be able to get that
>> > information.  The same with a domain name, which is the internet form
>> > of "property."
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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 for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
>> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
>> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
>> E-Mail [email-masked]
>> Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
>> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

CMSL> Regards,
CMSL> --
CMSL> Jeffrey A. Williams
CMSL> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CMSL> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
CMSL> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
CMSL> E-Mail [email-masked]
CMSL> Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
CMSL> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

- ----
Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
[email-masked]         http://www.inetconcepts.net
PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
- ----

- --
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, 20 Apr 2002 22:08:10 -0400
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue

George Kirikos wrote:

><big snip> :-)
>
>
>Reading through even more posts, people seem to be struggling for
>metaphors. The telephone example tends to be overused. If we look at
>the example in trademark registries, there's sufficient "whois" data
>for a trademark to be able to serve someone. Individuals, companies,
>and other entities register trademarks, without some of the personal
>safety issues that freaks out some individuals. Trademarks represent
>division of a public resource/namespace, like domain names. 
>
Not quite.  I agree with much of what you wrote in your "audacious 
post", but trademarks are not "like domain names" as you say here. 
Trademark interests have been granted a de facto formal [and dare I say 
"moral"] precedence of claim over mere "registrants" or "cybersquatters" 
[as registrants sometimes get _libeled_].  The trademark interests' 
abuse of process is staggering to consider when viewed through a wider 
lense.  

You want an economic argument (leaving aside the privacy issue for a 
moment), let us consider the very nature of ICANN's heretofore technical 
coordination role, its benefits and costs.  What have they coordinated, 
what has it cost, and who has benefited?   As we all know, the scarcity 
of domain names is artificial.    Their "coordination" has not had 
anything to do with anything of a strictly "technical" nature unless we 
mean the artifical scarcity of dn suffixes.  The ICANN's entire role 
to-date has been on the policy side of "technically coordinating" the 
DNS. Through the sheer technicality of their jargon most people can't be 
bothered to even attempt to understand what the true role of ICANN has 
been heretofore vis a vis the Internet as a whole.  What is the benefit 
in the artificial scarcity of domain name suffixes? Who benefits from 
this scarcity?  What is the cost of such protectionism?  Who pays for it 
all?  

The ICANN as regulator of this market has taken on a certain 
extra/supralegal dimension of nebulous unaccountability which imposes 
upon what should be a free and unfettered medium of information flow and 
exchange.  Can you estimate what their imposition has cost the Markets 
of the World?

>Similarly, 
>in the case of licensing of radio or TV stations -- it's made easy for
>the public to look up the owner of that frequency/station.
>Registrations of corporations, personal businesses, etc. are another
>metaphor. Some folks seemed to have attempted to make the domain itself
>a unique legal entity unto itself, and that argument is deeply flawed.
>One can't "serve" a domain or find it responsible for itself.
>
I, for one, agreed with your comments on the Technical Contact becoming 
the de facto legal contact and only required listing in the WHOIS.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Hermes Network, Inc.

- --
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, 20 Apr 2002 19:31:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Hello,

- --- Rick Wesson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> wow, we were just about to choose the icannatlarge for one of our
> regular
> donations.
> 
> I would have lent some Alice's financial support...
> 
> thanks for illuminating a real issue.

I noticed that quite a while ago too, and hence decided not to join it,
until it has real credibility, instead of having situations where one
person is "in charge", esp. with regards to finances.

Although, if I'm not mistaken, those might have been in New Zealand
dollars, and aren't at par with the US Dollar?

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.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, 20 Apr 2002 19:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Bulk WHOIS Data Issue

Hi Sotiris,

- --- Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Not quite.  I agree with much of what you wrote in your "audacious 
> post", but trademarks are not "like domain names" as you say here. 

Oh, it wasn't meant to be a perfect metaphor. It's just an example of
something where there's a central database of contact info. I forgot to
mention another example which might have been more relevant, which is
the ARIN Database for IP addresses (I guess there's also RIPE, and the
Asian version too, although it seems the blocks they grant are so
enormous that there's no granularity to narrow one's search for the
contact of a particular IP range). 

> You want an economic argument (leaving aside the privacy issue for a 
> moment), let us consider the very nature of ICANN's heretofore
> technical 
> coordination role, its benefits and costs.  What have they
> coordinated, 
> what has it cost, and who has benefited?   As we all know, the

I believe their travel agents have been major beneficiaries. ;)

(I'm reminded of some of the hilarious arguments over WLS, that no one
at the public forum in Ghana spoke up against it -- lol! As though
typical registrants affected by this are going to get their
immunizations shots, and fly to Africa to speak up. Same for
Romania...)

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.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, 20 Apr 2002 20:28:24 -0700
From: Bret Fausett <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

> So far he has submitted nearly $4000 in "costs" for his time.

We're trying to get the At Large up and running with self-funded efforts.
The initial contributions that came from some of the ALSC members and others
were made with the understanding that the costs of building the web site,
including services rendered, would be paid. Volunteer efforts are wonderful,
but sometimes you have to pay to get real work done. The expenses linked in
an earlier e-mail in this thread look entirely reasonable to me (please note
that the rates are in NZ currency).

     -- Bret

- --
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, 20 Apr 2002 22:42:46 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

At 8:28 PM -0700 4/20/02, Bret Fausett wrote:
>> So far he has submitted nearly $4000 in "costs" for his time.
>
>We're trying to get the At Large up and running with self-funded efforts.
>The initial contributions that came from some of the ALSC members and others
>were made with the understanding that the costs of building the web site,
>including services rendered, would be paid. Volunteer efforts are wonderful,
>but sometimes you have to pay to get real work done. The expenses linked in
>an earlier e-mail in this thread look entirely reasonable to me (please note
>that the rates are in NZ currency).

But still appear to be being charged out at pre-crash rates!

Even in $NZ it's a lot of money for what's been delivered.

Maybe it was costed using the calculator that was pressed into service for
the billing of the current NZ domain registry? :^)

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.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, 20 Apr 2002 23:22:36 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Saturday, Saturday, April 20, 2002, 7:31:35 PM, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,

> --- Rick Wesson <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> wow, we were just about to choose the icannatlarge for one of our
>> regular
>> donations.
>> 
>> I would have lent some Alice's financial support...
>> 
>> thanks for illuminating a real issue.

> I noticed that quite a while ago too, and hence decided not to join it,
> until it has real credibility, instead of having situations where one
> person is "in charge", esp. with regards to finances.

> Although, if I'm not mistaken, those might have been in New Zealand
> dollars, and aren't at par with the US Dollar?

He specifically stipulates they are in US Dollars.

- -- 
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: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 23:24:40 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Saturday, Saturday, April 20, 2002, 8:28:24 PM, Bret Fausett wrote:

>> So far he has submitted nearly $4000 in "costs" for his time.

> We're trying to get the At Large up and running with self-funded efforts.
> The initial contributions that came from some of the ALSC members and others
> were made with the understanding that the costs of building the web site,
> including services rendered, would be paid. Volunteer efforts are wonderful,
> but sometimes you have to pay to get real work done. The expenses linked in
> an earlier e-mail in this thread look entirely reasonable to me (please note
> that the rates are in NZ currency).

Sorry, but you are wrong.  They are in US currency.

The message stated that specifically.

BTW, now the forum is password protected, since this was exposed.

No big surprise there, the light gets shed on the truth, and Joop
takes unilateral action.

You people have been hoodwinked, like the IDNO founding members and
initial steering committee were, except you also got had for money.

- -- 
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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 01:36:40 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

At 11:24 PM -0700 4/20/02, William X Walsh wrote:
>BTW, now the forum is password protected, since this was exposed.
>
>No big surprise there, the light gets shed on the truth, and Joop
>takes unilateral action.

Well, look at that, would you.

And I though the new AtLarge would be an open process.

Got something to hide, Joop?

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 00:05:41 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Saturday, Saturday, April 20, 2002, 11:36:40 PM, Andy Gardner wrote:

> At 11:24 PM -0700 4/20/02, William X Walsh wrote:
>>BTW, now the forum is password protected, since this was exposed.
>>
>>No big surprise there, the light gets shed on the truth, and Joop
>>takes unilateral action.

> Well, look at that, would you.

> And I though the new AtLarge would be an open process.

> Got something to hide, Joop?

You know, I said to myself the other day I should be pulling archives
of this stuff down locally, and fully intended to start doing so, but
just hadn't gotten around to it yet.

Now I wish I had done it right away, as there is no guarantee that the
data will be available publicly again now that it has been exposed.

I wonder which of his self appointed "advisors" approved of his
locking of the forums (rhetorical question, we know he acted
unilaterally).

- -- 
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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 03:07:00 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

> At 11:24 PM -0700 4/20/02, William X Walsh wrote:
> >BTW, now the forum is password protected, since this was exposed.

The forum has always been password protected, nothing new there. Thanks are
in order to Joop for a speedy reaction to fix a small problem. Well done!

Regards,
Joanna

- --
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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 02:10:20 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

At 12:05 AM -0700 4/21/02, William X Walsh wrote:

>I wonder which of his self appointed "advisors" approved of his
>locking of the forums (rhetorical question, we know he acted
>unilaterally).

Been there, done that, got the ICANN Mug to prove it.

I wonder when the minions will be given their secret decoder rings?

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 03:15:07 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

> I wonder which of his self appointed "advisors" approved of his
> locking of the forums (rhetorical question, we know he acted
> unilaterally).
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>

You are mistaken, there is nothing wrong with the forums, it's business as
usual.
Regards,
Joanna

- --
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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 00:16:21 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Sunday, Sunday, April 21, 2002, 12:07:00 AM, Joanna Lane wrote:

>> At 11:24 PM -0700 4/20/02, William X Walsh wrote:
>> >BTW, now the forum is password protected, since this was exposed.

> The forum has always been password protected, nothing new there. Thanks are
> in order to Joop for a speedy reaction to fix a small problem. Well done!

No, it hasn't Joanna.

This is a blatant lie.  From inception until earlier this evening
after this all came out on here, the forums were publicly available,
you had to login via a web script to post, but anyone could read.

Do not lie to defend your buddy, Joanna, it only ruins your own
credibility, and doesn't help Joop's any.

What probably happened here is the same thing that happened when the
IDNO.org website mysteriously disappeared one night after Joop got mad
at the the growing calls for his resignation from the IDNO, someone
pointed out how bad it made him look, and told him that if he
brought it back, they would make a post making it look like a
technical glitch.

- -- 
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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 03:21:00 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Look Andy, why don't you and William go and play King and Queen of the
castle in your little IDNO sandbox which you fought so hard to win, and stop
trying to poison yet another mailing list with your vitriolic hatred. It
gets very old.
Joanna

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Andy
> Gardner
> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 3:10 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked
>
>
> At 12:05 AM -0700 4/21/02, William X Walsh wrote:
>
> >I wonder which of his self appointed "advisors" approved of his
> >locking of the forums (rhetorical question, we know he acted
> >unilaterally).
>
> Been there, done that, got the ICANN Mug to prove it.
>
> I wonder when the minions will be given their secret decoder rings?
>
> --
> Andrew P. Gardner
> barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
> We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
> Get active: http://www.tldlobby.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
>

- --
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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 00:21:17 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Sunday, Sunday, April 21, 2002, 12:07:00 AM, Joanna Lane wrote:

> The forum has always been password protected, nothing new there.

Also, if the forum has always been password protected, why isn't it
password protected anymore once Joop was told how bad his locking the
forum was making him look?

> Thanks are
> in order to Joop for a speedy reaction to fix a small problem. Well done!

Let's be clear about this.

In order for the Authorization Required feature to work, which is what
was happening when the forum was inaccessible, one must CREATE a file
called .htaccess in the directory the forum was hosted from, and in
that file they must include the following lines:

AuthType Basic
AuthUserFile /path/to/a/password/file/.htpasswd
AuthName "A Name of the Website Area"
require valid-user

There is no way that anyone can claim this was "accidentally" done
with any credibility.

It is not a simple configuration option that you could easily and
accidentally turn on.

- -- 
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: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 00:22:17 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannatlarge.com hacked

Sunday, Sunday, April 21, 2002, 12:15:07 AM, Joanna Lane wrote:

>> I wonder which of his self appointed "advisors" approved of his
>> locking of the forums (rhetorical question, we know he acted
>> unilaterally).
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>

> You are mistaken, there is nothing wrong with the forums, it's business as

Joanna, are you calling the people who tried to go there and got the
Authorization Required message liars?

It was fixed, most likely after someone pointed out how bad it was
making him look to have done it, but it was there, whether you choose
to admit it or not.

- -- 
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 #1135
*************************