Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1149
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Wednesday, May 1 2002           Volume 01 : Number 1149

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

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 10:11:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] did you know?

On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 [email-masked] wrote:

> technical protocol.  ICANN is ready to collapse, Mr. lynn is a beacon of
> doom.

A beacon of doom.  How appropriate.  I love the association - so accurate.

regards
joe

www.dot-god.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, 30 Apr 2002 10:36:45 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Interim Report of the Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform

http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/report-29apr02.htm
- --
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, 30 Apr 2002 10:40:13 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Policy

The following was recently published by;

The TACD includes 45 European and 20 US
consumer organizations
(http://www.tacd.org/about/participants.htm).

"4.   ICANN should not be empowered to use control over
essential Internet name and numbering resources to address
broader public policy issues."

This is extremely pollyannic.  I know Karl keeps pounding on limiting
ICANNs mission.  But just hiding our heads in the sand and pretending
that controlling the names and numbering system does not effect broader
public policy does not change the reality that it really does effect in
a huge way public policy.

Denying responsibility for the effects of ones actions is socially and
morally corrupt.

I personally hold the US DoC primarily responsible.  Through total
inaction and complete incompetence they have allowed ICANN to become an
international electronic human rights terrorist organization.

The have developed policies that have created an atmosphere where
personal property rights are violated and sovereignty of nations is
ignored.

Sincerely,
Eric

- --
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, 30 Apr 2002 20:15:52 +0200
From: "DNSO Secretariat" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] NC teleconf agenda May 2,  2002

[To: [email-masked];[email-masked]]
[To: [email-masked]]

 DNSO NAMES COUNCIL AGENDA - May 2, 2002

6:00 LA, 9:00 New York, 15:00 Paris, Japan/ Korea 22:00, 23:00 Melbourne)
  Local time between April and October, Summer in the Northern Hemisphere
  ------------------------------------------------------------
  Reference (Coordinated Universal Time)     UTC         13:00
  ------------------------------------------------------------
  California, USA                            UTC-8+1DST   6:00
  Monterrey, Mexico                       UTC-6+1DST   8:00
  Lima, Peru                                 UTC-5+0DST   8:00 
  Washington DC, USA                   (EST) UTC-5+1DST   9:00
  St.Thomas, Virgin Islands                  UTC-4+0DST   9:00
  Buenos Aires, Argentina                    UTC-3+0DST   9:00
  London, United Kingdom                     UTC+0+1DST  14:00
  Brussels, Belgium                    (CET) UTC+1+1DST  15:00
  Barcelona, Spain                     (CET) UTC+1+1DST  15:00
  Frankfurt, Germany                   (CET) UTC+1+1DST  15:00
  Paris, France                        (CET) UTC+1+1DST  15:00
  Jerusalem, Israel                          UTC+2+1DST  16:00
  Seoul, Korea                               UTC+9+0DST  22:00
  Tokyo, Japan                               UTC+9+0DST  22:00
  Melbourne, Australia                      UTC+10+0DST  23:00 
  Auckland, New Zealand                     UTC+12+0DST  01:00 (Friday)
  ------------------------------------------------------------
For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/
  
PROPOSED NAMES COUNCIL AGENDA  May 2, 2002

1. Recommendations v7 - agreement on recommendations 14, 15, 16
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020424.Response-Reform-v7.html

2. Update dot ORG Task Force

3. Discussion on policy development mechanisms

4. AOB

The next teleconference will be on 14 May at 15.00 Paris time.
See http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2002.NC-calendar.html

DNSO Secretariat

- --
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, 30 Apr 2002 12:32:04 -0700
From: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Policy

Eric Dierker wrote:

>The following was recently published by;
>
>The TACD includes 45 European and 20 US
>consumer organizations
>(http://www.tacd.org/about/participants.htm).
>
>
>"4.   ICANN should not be empowered to use control over
>essential Internet name and numbering resources to address
>broader public policy issues."
>
>This is extremely pollyannic.  I know Karl keeps pounding on limiting
>ICANNs mission.  But just hiding our heads in the sand and pretending
>that controlling the names and numbering system does not effect broader
>public policy does not change the reality that it really does effect in
>a huge way public policy.
>
This shows exptreme misapprehension. Everyone knows that controlling 
names and numbers,
given the economic turn given to what was once a purely technical matter 
by NSI, ICANN,
Verisign, etc., has policy implications.  What Karl objects to, and 
rightly, is having ICANN
make those global policy decisions.  That is why it is essential for 
ICANN to get booted and
be replaced by some global entity that is (a) not in the hands of the 
commercial profiteers,
especially as to domain names and trademarks; (b) and actually has some 
expertise in social
issues and public policy.  On their point that you quote, TACD has it 
exactly right.

>
>Denying responsibility for the effects of ones actions is socially and
>morally corrupt.
>
Some day I wish you'd learn to quit throwing epithets at people and 
using foul language in these
posts. Everything that you disagree with you attack on moral grounds, 
rather than taking the time
to understand the issue and give the other party credit for trying to do 
the right thing. (No, it's the
soapbox, with The Reverend Eric delivering his throwaway cliches.)

Bill Lovell

>
>I personally hold the US DoC primarily responsible.  Through total
>inaction and complete incompetence they have allowed ICANN to become an
>international electronic human rights terrorist organization.
>
>The have developed policies that have created an atmosphere where
>personal property rights are violated and sovereignty of nations is
>ignored.
>
>Sincerely,
>Eric
>
>--
>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, 30 Apr 2002 16:13:00 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Challenge

Alejandro,

By making particular mention in your Interim Report of the Heathrow 
Declaration (which in my view is neither an extensive nor in-depth proposal 
and only parrots the Lynn Plan), and by citing the Amsterdam meeting which 
went exhaustively into a fresh analysis of S. Lynn’s reform proposal, you are 
creating the impression that the Board Committee on Evolution and Reform will 
once again be renamed to the ICANN Board Committee to Implement the Lynn Plan.

Your recent comments in the last Names Council teleconference tend to add to 
this perception.  My concern is whether a Committee that is solely populated 
by Board members can *objectively* prepare any recommendations that are not 
in keeping with the already tendered proposals of your fellow Board member 
and CEO, Stuart Lynn.  

I would be willing to bet that an Independant Panel looking at the very same 
raw input that your Committee has received might well come up with a 
different set of viable recommendations.  In the spirit of fairness and for 
the sake of guaranteed objectivity, would you be willing to allow another 
Panel to review the same data, and to issue it's own independent conclusions 
for consideration by the ICANN Board?

- --
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, 30 Apr 2002 16:50:28 -0400
From: "James Love" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] CPTech comments on ICANN reform

http://www.cptech.org/ecom/icann/reform-comments.html

- --------------------------------
James Love mailto:[email-masked]
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040

- --
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, 30 Apr 2002 12:13:25 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] .US Scam warning

FYI.

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Subject: Scam Warning! Please read.
>
>
> Dear Valued Go Daddy customer,
>
> Tuesday morning, alert Go Daddy customers notified me that another
> scammer is after your personal information. Our legal team is already
> working with the FBI to take any and all appropriate action.
>
> In the meantime, I want to make sure you're informed and protected. Here
> are the details of the scam:
>
> Someone is sending emails to our recent .US domain registrants. The emails
> are disguised as coming from " [email-masked] ".  This is a
> legitimate Go
> Daddy email address, but these emails are not coming from us.
>
> The scammer's email instructs recipients to divulge - via fax - their Go
> Daddy account login, user name and password; their Social Security
> Number; and proof of address. The pretence provided is that this
> information is needed to verify eligibility for the .US domain. Again, the
> scammers are requesting this information be sent to a fax number in
> Nevada.
>
> I want you to know two things: First, Go Daddy would never ask for this
> information, in any form, period. We'd never ask for your Social Security
> number. And we never ask you to fax or mail us your personal information.
>
> Second, the scammers did not get your email contact information from Go
> Daddy. Scam artists constantly probe the "Whois" database, the central
> repository of ownership information for all domain name owners. (You can
> think of the Whois database as being the Internet equivalent of your local
> County Recorder's office. Real estate ownership information is required by
> law to be public; it's the same with domain name ownership
>
> I won't speculate as to the intent of these scammers, but it can't be
> good. So please: If you receive one of the emails I've described above (or
> any other communication that makes you suspicious in the future) please do
> not respond to them! Instead, forward them to the special address I've set
> up: [email-masked]
>
> Your best protection against scammers is awareness. So please stay on
> guard, and if you receive any communication that strikes you as
> suspicious, forward it to [email-masked]
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Bob Parsons
> President,
> Go Daddy Software, Inc.
> http://www.godaddy.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, 30 Apr 2002 22:18:18 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Problems, as cited by Mr. Lynn

J. Scott Evans, in his recent post to the Council list, has noted that the 
ICANN Evolution and Reform Committee has not received enough specific 
proposals on how ICANN can and/or should evolve to solve the problems that 
Stuart identified in his original paper.

With this thought in mind, I have drafted a complete and bulleted list of the 
problems that were cited in Mr. Lynn's original paper so that the Council may 
better focus on providing specific solutions.  Hope this helps...

Document at http://www.icannworld.org/problems.htm

- --
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: Wed, 01 May 2002 17:25:55 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Problems, as cited by Mr. Lynn

At 22:18 30/04/02 -0400, [email-masked] wrote:

>With this thought in mind, I have drafted a complete and bulleted list of the
>problems that were cited in Mr. Lynn's original paper so that the Council may
>better focus on providing specific solutions.  Hope this helps...
>
>Document at http://www.icannworld.org/problems.htm

Thanks Danny. Very useful.

As a suggestion the help the Board Committee forward:

35. At-Large �
�[Stuart L.]    For three years, this issue has dominated the ICANN agenda, 
occupied a considerable portion of very limited resources, and despite all 
this effort has still not produced an acceptable plan.

In effect this "issue" has been an on-going extra-judicial litigation in 
the public space.  Litigation is resorted to when the parties who *should* 
sit down  together refuse to do so. As Stuart notes, it is a significant 
distraction to management and its resources in time and money.

Recommendation: that the ICANN CEO and Staff initiates meaningful 
discussion, both public and private, with those individuals with whom  they 
thus far have been least inclined to do so.

�       no consensus to be found on At-Large.

Recommendation: that the Board Committee urges Mr Lynn and staff to look 
harder for common ground between supply and demand side stakeholders.

�       We must find another, more effective path for appropriate input 
into the ICANN process by the general user community that will accomplish 
the key purpose underlying the At Large concept � to ensure that the broad 
public interest is effectively reflected and protected in the ICANN 
consensus development process.

Not only broad public interest, also the specific interest of Individual 
Domain Name Holders must find its expression in the policy making bodies of 
ICANN.
Recommendation: that the Board follow the recommendations of the DNSO 
general assembly and allow an Individual Domain Name Holders' constituency 
into the organs of the DNSO.

�       ICANN would benefit greatly from an At Large organization that 
could conduct outreach, foster deliberation, and attract new ideas and 
voices to the ICANN process. I believe that a reformed ICANN should include 
this kind of At Large entity, designed to connect individuals in a very 
open and direct way to the ICANN process

Recommendation: that the Board Committee cautions the CEO and staff not to 
engage in practices of divide and rule or "selective encouragement" among 
the leaders of newly emerging At Large formation efforts.

- --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--
   interim webmaster
www.icannatlarge.com
Sign up and spread the word.

- --
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: Wed, 1 May 2002 09:40:30 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] STOP Jeff Williams !!!

Wednesday, May 01, 2002, 3:17:46 AM, Gr�goire Seither wrote:

> Can someone please tell Mister Williams to stop sending unsollicited mail to
> people - I used to subscribe to the DNSO list, but have since then
> unsubscribed, but Mister Williams has obviously no knowledge of how a
> mailing lists works and keeps me in his cc: list.

> I have been sending him polite messages asking to be removed from his spam,
> but to no avail. 

Complain to his ISP's Abuse department.  [email-masked]

They have policies against harassment, which continuing to email you
after repeated demands to cease would qualify as.

He does it because he is not permitted to post to the GA list because
of his past abuses, and this is his way of trying to get around it.

It is abusive,  I agree, and I hope you pursue it with them.

You should send his messages to you to [email-masked] with full
headers intact so that they can verify that he is one of their
netcom.com/mindspring users.  If enough people complained, maybe they
would do something about him.

- -- 
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 #1149
*************************