Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1183
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Sunday, May 12 2002            Volume 01 : Number 1183

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

Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 22:42:02 -0400
From: t byfield <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ...but we lied

[email-masked] (Fri 05/10/02 at 09:50 PM -0700):

> > We said that "Our goal is to replace each and every one of the current Board
> > members as soon as possible", ...but we lied.

esther dyson testifying before congress.

> > We said that "it is ICANN's highest priority to complete the work necessary
> > to implement a workable At-Large membership structure and to conduct
> > elections for the nine At-Large Directors that must be chosen by the
> > membership", ...but we lied.

same.

> > We said that "The bylaws now make it clear that the Board has an
> > unconditional mandate to create a membership structure that will elect the
> > At Large Directors of the Board", ...but we lied.

dyson in a 6 nov 1998 letter to becky burr

> > We said that we will reserve Article II of our Bylaws "for use when the
> > Corporation has members", ... but we lied.

bylaws as of 6 nov 1998 (and maybe later--can't be bothered to
check).

> > We said that ICANN will "operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open
> > and transparent manner and consistent with procedures designed to ensure
> > fairness" ... but we lied.

bylaws.

> > We said that "ICANN must facilitate the translation of final documents into
> > various appropriate languages" ...but we lied.

bylaws as of 6 nov 1998 (and maybe later--can't be bothered to
check).

> > We said that the task of the Independent Review Panel Nominating Committee
> > "is well underway, and should be fully implemented within a few months"
> > ...but we lied.

3 july 2001 thurd staus report to the DoC.

> > We said that "Some remain concerned that the Initial Board could simply
> > amend the bylaws and remove the membership provisions that we have just
> > described above. We commit that this will not happen." ... but we lied.

dyson, 6 nov 1998.

> Interesting, but it would be moreso if you gave attributions for your quotes.
>
> I'm not doubting that these things were said, or that ICANN mangement has
> failed to live up to various stated intentions, but I'd like to know the
> sources.  

'google'.

cheers,
t
- --
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, 10 May 2002 21:47:45 -0500
From: "Hugh Blair" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] ...but we lied

Comments within message.
Watch for URL-WRAP.
Google is your friend.
Danny is right on.
- -Hugh

> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of Sandy Harris
>
> [email-masked] wrote:
> >
> > We said that "Our goal is to replace each and every one of the current Board
> > members as soon as possible", ...but we lied.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=oRtB&q=%22Our+goal+is+
to+replace+each%22
http://www.gcn.com/vol18_no24/community/361-1.html
> >
> > We said that "it is ICANN's highest priority to complete the work necessary
> > to implement a workable At-Large membership structure and to conduct
> > elections for the nine At-Large Directors that must be chosen by the
> > membership", ...but we lied.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=oRtB&q=%22it+is+ICANN%
27s+highest+priority+to+complete%22
http://com-notes.house.gov/cchear/hearings106.nsf/768df0faa6d9ddab852564f1004886
c0/8467221f7c9d1630852567b70049d574?OpenDocument
> >
> > We said that "The bylaws now make it clear that the Board has an
> > unconditional mandate to create a membership structure that will
> > elect the At Large Directors of the Board", ...but we lied.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=oRtB&q=%22The+bylaws+n
ow+make+it+clear%22
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/msg00480.shtml
> >
> > We said that we will reserve Article II of our Bylaws "for use when the
> > Corporation has members", ... but we lied.
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/msg00585.shtml
> >
> > We said that ICANN will "operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open
> > and transparent manner and consistent with procedures designed to ensure
> > fairness" ... but we lied.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=oRtB&q=%22operate+to+t
he+maximum+extent+feasible%22
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-review/Arc02/msg03246.html
> >
> > We said that "ICANN must facilitate the translation of final documents into
> > various appropriate languages" ...but we lied.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=oRtB&q=%22ICANN+must+f
acilitate+the+translation%22
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/dyson-to-burr-06nov98.htm
> >
> > We said that the task of the Independent Review Panel Nominating Committee
> > "is well underway, and should be fully implemented within a few months"
> > ...but we lied.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=oRtB&q=%22is+well+unde
rway%2C+and+should+be+fully+implemented+within+a+few+months%22
http://www.icann.org/general/statusreport-03jul01.htm
> >
> > We said that "Some remain concerned that the Initial Board could
> simply amend
> > the bylaws and remove the membership provisions that we have just described
> > above. We commit that this will not happen." ... but we lied.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=oRtB&q=%22Some+remain+
concerned+that+the+Initial+Board%22
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/msg01164.shtml
> >
> > How many more lies to the US Government should be tolerated?  Would anyone
> > like to offer a rationale as to why this incumbent ICANN management
> should be trusted?  All I see is lies and more lies.
>
> Interesting, but it would be moreso if you gave
> attributions for your quotes.

Does this give you enough assistance in continuing the research?

Sorry Danny, but I just had to have a little fun looking them up.

- -Hugh

- --
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, 10 May 2002 21:53:56 -0500
From: "Hugh Blair" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Registrar Advisory Concerning Whois Data Accuracy

> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of [email-masked]
> 
> Perhaps the first claim that could investigate is below (note the lack of 
> registrant fax, phone or email address):
> 
> Domain Name: inta.org   
> 
> Name servers: 
>     ns1.nac.net
>     ns2.nac.net
> 
> Creation date: Feb 23 1995 00:00:00
> Expiration date: Feb 24 2011 00:00:00
> 
> Registrant Contact:
>    NA
>    International Trademark Association   (NA)
>    NA
>    1133 Avenue of the Americas
>    New York, NY 10063-6710
>    New York, NY 10063-6710
>    US
> 
> 
> Billing, Administrative Contact:
>    NA
>    International Trademark Association   (NA)
>    NA
>    1133 Avenue of the Americas
>    New York, NY 10063-6710
>    New York, NY 10063-6710
>    US

Technical :
Interland, Inc.
Support, Tech ([email-masked])
800-589-5060
303 Peachtree St
Suite 500
Atlanta, GA 30308
US

At least there is this.

- -Hugh
- --
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, 11 May 2002 01:08:26 -0400
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: [ALSC-Forum] How to distract the At-large

Danny et al.,

Thanks for the list Danny.  I'm wondering if you gathered 
contact email
addresses for the listed organizations, and if you'd care 
to share it
with myself or some other member(s) of the 
icannatlarge.com SC.  I think
it would be helpful to compile such a list as for our 
organization's
Outreach purposes.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

[email-masked] wrote:

 >Bruce,
 >
 >You seem to be under the mistaken impression that there 
is no At-Large "out
 >there", and that you need to heed the ICANN commandment 
to "go forth and
 >multiply" and create "brand new" At-Large structures. 
User associations are
 >out there by the thousands.  Just perform a search in 
any engine and you will
 >find them without difficulty.  I found these in a matter 
of minutes, and
 >there are thousands more...
 >
 >You have been suckered into the ICANN plan to distract 
the At-Large
 >opposition.  While you're taking your sweet time 
organizing yet another user
 >group, ICANN is busy laughing as they act to totally 
eliminate the At-Large
 >structure and kill off the At-Large directors.  But go 
ahead and have fun
 >with your Charter, your bylaws, and your voting.  Maybe 
it'll give you
 >something to keep doing after the At-Large is finally 
buried.
 >
 >Portland Visual Basic User Group
 >Portland Macintosh Users Group
 >Oregon Computer Consultants Association
 >Huntsville PC User Group
 >Australian Computer Society
 >Australian Visual Basic Users Group - S. Australia
 >LinuxSA (Linux Users of South Australia)
 >South Australian Apple Users Club
 >Southern Districts Computer Users Club Inc., S. Australia
 >All Computer Association of Orange County
 >Bay Area SAS Users Group
 >Channel Islands PC Users Group
 >Computer User Groups - Southern California
 >Fallbrook PC Users Group
 >Internet Developers Association, Orange County Chapter
 >NASA Ames Java User Group
 >Orange County Visual Basic Users Group
 >San Diego Delphi Users Group
 >San Diego Macintosh User Group
 >San Diego SAS Users Group
 >San Diego Visual Basic User Group
 >San Francisco FreeBSD User's Group
 >San Francisco PowerBuilder User Group
 >Silicon Valley WebGuild
 >Ottawa Carleton Linux Users Group
 >Ottawa Oracle User Group
 >Toronto Pet Users Group
 >Vancouver Windows NT User Group
 >AITP Mile High Chapter
 >Capital PC User Group
 >International Webmasters Association, Northwest Florida
 >Melbourne Linux User Group
 >Monticello Computer Group
 >PCBUG
 >Sarasota Personal Computer Users Group, Inc.
 >South Florida Windows NT/2000 User Group
 >Tampa Bay Computer Society
 >Southeastern Regional Internet Society
 >Chicago Computer Society
 >The Rest of Us
 >India Internet Java Users Group
 >Indianapolis OS/2 User's Group
 >Kansas City Webmasters
 >Downeast MacOS Users Group
 >Association for Women in Computing, Baltimore
 >Computer Users of Baltimore
 >Hagerstown "Computer" Users Group
 >Greater Boston Network Users Group
 >MacWoburn User Group
 >SouthEastern Michigan Computer Organization
 >Twin Cities Computer User Groups
 >Twin Cities System Administrators
 >St. Louis Java SIG
 >American Association for Artificial Intelligence
 >Association for Computational Linguistics
 >Association for Computing Machinery
 >Association for Multimedia Communications, Inc.
 >Association For Women in Computing
 >Association of Internet Professionals
 >Association of Online Professionals
 >Association of Personal Computer Users Groups
 >Be User Groups
 >Chic Computer Club
 >COMMON
 >Computer Game Developers' Association
 >Computer Security Institute
 >Convergence International
 >CPSR -- Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
 >DECUS Home Page
 >Fibre Channel Assocation
 >FIREBUG - The First BeBox Users' Group
 >IBM SP User Group
 >IEEE Communications Society
 >IEEE Computer Society
 >Independent Computer Products User Group
 >International Association for Management of Technology
 >International Association of Computer Professionals
 >International Oracle Users Group - Americas
 >International Webcasting Association
 >International Webmasters Association
 >Linux User Groups
 >Network Professional Association
 >Networking and Systems Professionals Association
 >SANS Institute
 >Software & Information Industry Association
 >Storage Networking Industry Association
 >The Association of Shareware Professionals
 >The CyberSkills Association
 >UniForum
 >USENIX Association
 >USENIX Online Library and Index
 >AITP-Cornhusker Chapter
 >Las Vegas Macintosh Users Group
 >New Mexico Internet Professionals Association
 >Albany New York PowerBuilder User Group
 >Staten Island Macromedia User Group
 >Unigroup of New York
 >Piedmont Triad NT Users Group
 >Triad Apple Core
 >Computer Erie Bay Users Group
 >Lorain County Computer Users Group
 >Visual Basic User Group of Cincinnati
 >Portland Macintosh Users Group
 >Harrisburg Unix Users Group
 >Coastal Mac User Group
 >AITP-Austin Chapter
 >Alamo PC
 >Apple Corps of Dallas Macintosh Users Group
 >Delphi Developers of Dallas
 >Houston Area Apple Users Group
 >TAMULUG
 >Tyler Area Macintosh Users
 >Dublin University Internet Society
 >IEE Informatics Division
 >Free Software & Linux Club at USU
 >Utah BeOS User Group
 >Utah Computer Society
 >Kitsap Macintosh Users Group
 >Strait Macintosh Users Group
 >Western Computer User Group
 >BayCHI - the San Francisco Bay Area chapter of ACM SIGCHI.
 >Software Ergonomics special interest group of the Swiss 
computer scientists'
 >federation
 >Greater Boston SIGCHI (The New England area chapter of 
ACM SIGCHI)
 >The New England Chapter of the Human Factors and 
Ergonomics Society
 >The Lone Star SIGCHI (The Dallas/Ft. Worth Chapter of 
SIGCHI)
 >The British HCI Group
 >IFIP (International Federation for Information Processing)
 >STIMDI (Swedish Interdisciplinary Interest Group for HCI)
 >EXUG - European X User Group
 >X Consortium
 >Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR)
 >IEEE Societies:
 >Computer Society
 >The Society on Social Implications of Technology (SSIT)
 >Systems, Man and Cybernetics Society
 >X/Open
 >International Ergonomics Association
 >Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES)
 >Northern Utah Computer-Human Interaction (NUCHI) Special 
Interest Group (SIG)
 >The Association for Software Design (ASD)
 >The Ergonomics Society (in Great Britain)
 >HICOM
 >

- --
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, 11 May 2002 01:51:21 -0400
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Preamble/Mission Statement. 

It's usually nice to have an opening sentence or two, something like the 
following, maybe?

"Our organization is a grass-roots, autogenous, International Community 
of Individual Internet Users, committed to the goal of effectively 
representing the interests of its Membership within the ICANN.  Formed 
as a direct response to the ALSC recommendations to the ICANN BoD, the 
ICANNAtLarge.com Membership is dedicated to a bottom-up,  transparent 
and accountable initiative towards the achievement of meaningful and 
direct participation in ICANN policy making."

Well, it's a start anyway... comments, additions, welcome.

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

- --
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, 11 May 2002 02:05:10 -0400
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Preamble/Mission Statement.

Woops.  Sorry 'bout that.  This message was not intended for this forum 
[honest].

Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> It's usually nice to have an opening sentence or two, something like the
> following, maybe?
>
> "Our organization is a grass-roots, autogenous, International Community
> of Individual Internet Users, committed to the goal of effectively
> representing the interests of its Membership within the ICANN.  Formed
> as a direct response to the ALSC recommendations to the ICANN BoD, the
> ICANNAtLarge.com Membership is dedicated to a bottom-up, transparent
> and accountable initiative towards the achievement of meaningful and
> direct participation in ICANN policy making."
>
> Well, it's a start anyway... comments, additions, welcome.
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
>
>
>
>
>

- --
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, 11 May 2002 00:39:21 -0700
From: Gary Osbourne <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar Advisory Concerning Whois Data Accuracy

At 07:51 PM 10/05/02 -0700, William X Walsh wrote:

>Friday, May 10, 2002, 7:43:21 PM, Gary Osbourne wrote:
> > At 08:52 PM 10/05/02 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:
> >>
> >>Of course you could use something like:
> >>http://www.hiddenregistration.com/
>
> > To find postal codes? And it's called full disclosure,
> > look into it. -g
>
>No, its called "Accurate"  which is all that is required.

Sorry for being obtuse. I meant full disclosure regarding
any connection between the poster and
http://www.hiddenregistration.com/

BTW, Section 3.7.7.3 of the RAA here
http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm#3.7.7.2
states:

- ----
Any Registered Name Holder that intends to license use
of a domain name to a third party is nonetheless the
Registered Name Holder of record and is responsible for
providing its own full contact information and for providing
and updating accurate technical and administrative contact
information adequate to facilitate timely resolution of any
problems that arise in connection with the Registered Name.
- -----

Who then is the Registered Name 'Holder', and is
hiddenregistration.com or another go-between a licensee? -g

- --
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, 11 May 2002 00:35:48 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] moderate approach

I basically do not buy into this positive stuff.  But here is a shot at
it.

The members of the GA of the DNSO are really pissed off (that is the
American parlance, while some of us maybe drunk, what I mean is mad) and
so we think a strong statement condemning ICANN is in order.

Therefor and wherefore and heretofore and all that stuff;

We think a clean sheet may well be in order.  We have adopted a term
called "a call for rebid" which is probably completely inaccurate.  But,
what we mean is:

Since ICANN itself has admitted failure, could this whole deal be opened
up so that others have a shot or at least there could be some open and
transparent competition and the issues could be laid on the table.

Could we do a little collective sole searching and either follow the old
plan (white and green papers which most of users like) or develop a new
more interactive user based type plan.

May we have a little help in developing some global type of outreach and
openness and user representation.
No, not a ton of help but a little help.

The DoC has released a monkey that became a gorilla, can you at least
take a little responsibility to put it back in its' cage?  Or maybe give
us a new monkey that stays a monkey and does not try to become Godzilla?

The point is that formal legal garbage makes us Internet people lose
perspective.  So can we just kind of really say what most of us feel and
let the lawyers and accountants and bill me gates and US Senators reword
it?

Hey the bottom line is that a lot of us are mad as hell and we do not
want to take it anymore.

WXW, Ross, Jeff, Marilyn, Jamie, TR and Jefsey I think I speak here for
our people, yours and mine and that we can agree on this perspective.

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: Sat, 11 May 2002 04:07:53 -0400
From: t byfield <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar Advisory Concerning Whois Data Accuracy

[email-masked] (Sat 05/11/02 at 12:39 AM -0700):

> Who then is the Registered Name 'Holder', and is
> hiddenregistration.com or another go-between a licensee? -g

that depends on whether the Domed One gets it in his Dome that this
company is somehow hindering his ability to project his Weltanschau-
ung on die Welt. and that, in turn, depends on how the Whois Com^W
i mean Task^W i mean Informal Group feels that this company hinders
their ability to convert registration info into an IP surveillance
racket. right now, i suspect they've got other stuff on the front 
burner, like making sure ICANN gets its MoU renewed. oh, yeah, and
that US federal legislation they're pushing--and ICANN is happily
obliging with the advisory they issued today.

cheers,
t
- --
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, 11 May 2002 07:30:54 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Shareholders file class action suit against Verisign

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020511/112003_1.html
BALTIMORE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 11, 2002--Law Offices Of Charles J.
Piven, P.A. today announced that a securities class action has been
commenced on behalf of shareholders who acquired VeriSign, Inc.
(Nasdaq: VRSN - News) securities between January 25, 2001 and April
25, 2002, inclusive (the Class Period).

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, against defendants VeriSign and
certain of its officers and directors.

The action charges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by engaging in conduct throughout the Class Period that had the
effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's
securities.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

- -- 
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, 11 May 2002 11:33:00 -0400
From: Dan Steinberg <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] other approaches and concerns

ummmmm is any of this really relevant?

either the motion stands on its merits or it doesnt.  What james love
does in his day job (or I do) is perhaps amusing to read, but beyond
that??????

can we all make an attempt to stick to issues and not people, please?

George Kirikos wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> --- "Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > Jamie, if there is no evidence of recruitment just for this vote in
> > any undue quantity, then I may stand corrected on that point. I think
> 
> Marilyn, there was the post here:
> 
> http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/ecommerce/2002q2/000772.html
> 
> on one of the cptech.org mailing lists, but who can tell if it created
> much quantity... Checking the Alexa stats for how popular that site is:
> 
> http://xslt.alexa.com/data/cli100?srv=-1&client=3&url=cptech.org
> 
> they're not in the top 100,000 websites on the web. The DNSO has a much
> bigger audience, see:
> 
> http://xslt.alexa.com/data/cli100?srv=-1&client=3&url=dnso.org
> 
> in 62,034th place of all sites on the web.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Shopping - Mother's Day is May 12th!
> http://shopping.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

- -- 
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin		phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec		fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:[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, 11 May 2002 08:33:59 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Re: How do you "rebid" a cartel ?

Damn fine points here Sir;

Let me deal with them in order if you do not mind.

Jim Fleming wrote:

> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc10/msg01636.html
> From: [email-masked]
>
> "We think a clean sheet may well be in order.  We have adopted a term
> called "a call for rebid" which is probably completely inaccurate."
> ====
>
> How do you "rebid" a cartel ?
>
> How do you prevent the same people from gaming the new system ?
>

Can't do it.  You cannot legislate morality, and even if you could, God forbid,
whose morality would you chose?  But I am a policy writer. I write things not to
work but how they should work.
When I think of the same people gaming I think of the same breed of wolves not
necessarily the same wolf.

>
> Do you understand how deeply rooted the collusion is ?
> ...and how many years of history those roots have been growing ?
>

I wish I did not.  But I do, in large part thanks to you.

>
> Also, if the DOC did "rebid" ICANN, which I imagine it will not,
> how would you stop the flow of money from the National Science Foundation
> which funds some of the underlying collusion ? Do you expect all of the
> NSF grants to be re-bid ?

Short fuse and not a good ending.  Take their do re me and accept their listen to
me.
Yes Jim for the sake of independence I have to give up the money.  And yes the
academics may play a roll but a much lessened one.

> Once done ending all of the NSF funding,
> will you then end the DOD funding ?...and the collusion with all of the
> DOD, DARPA, ARPA, cronies?

Do we have a freaking choice?  These silly alphabet soup "cronies" should be
dealing with technical stuff that is not three years out of date anyway.  Let
ICANN, and its' successor dabble with things like the existing toy root and domain
name issues and let those combinations of letters above move on to real internet
issues.

> Will all of the funding be removed for
> all of the spooks and operatives being paid to populate the ICANN debates?
> What agencies of the U.S. Government pay those people ? Do you plan
> to "rebid" all of those activities ?
>

Bullshit on this one big guy.  This will remain the public information highway and
so the spooks and anyone who wants to control information will need to be
involved.  EU and CN will soon create new and cooler highways so the spooks with
also have to go there.  Plus to control matters one must ultimately fund them so
funds will always be available, it is just the price tag of those funds that jerks
like me have to watch.

>
> Also...
> Do you expect ARIN and NANOG to sit quietly while you "rebid" ICANN ?
> http://www.nanog.org/arin.html
> Even if ICANN were rebid, or disappeared, don't you think that ARIN
> would run everything, as they do now?...since they control .ARPA
> ARIN is now funding LACNIC, don't you think the pyramid and the
> I* society multi-level-marketing *people structure* would remain and the
> names would be changed to confuse the press and the average apathetic netizen ?
>

Maybe, but is the possibility of failure a reason not to try?  I think not and I
think you think not!

As far as this latest alphabet soup, they are a joke.  If they want to stay and
play in the toy zone that is their option.  Could I in good conscience advise a
Country to rely on any of them?  No.  So there is your practical answer.  I had a
great meeting with a serious ISP/ASP and all ip to ip costs me is money. Can they
handle your wacko IPv60040 million, of course.  As soon as you are ready, folks
like me will make it sexy and then it will be a reality.

>
> Do you plan to "rebid" or reallocate all of the 32-bit IPv4 allocations ?
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
>

No Jim this is not something we "rebid" this is something we pay for out the
- ---------.
But why in the hell would someone pay extra dough for a 92 plymouth when he can get
a 2002 Flemming for the same price?

>
> Jim Fleming
> http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt

God Bless NaperVille,
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: Sun, 12 May 2002 11:48:45 +0200
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Call for support until Monday 13th

Dear all,

would people who want the motion below to be included
in a GA vote please send me a short statement of
support privately (not to the list please -- I will
post the list of names when it is collected) to
<[email-masked]> ? Thanks! As you probably
know by now, 10 (ten) supporters are needed to get
this included, and they are needed until Monday
13th, so please reply as soon as you can.

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whereas there are certain basic principles which have to be honored
        by an entity coordinating key Internet resources in order to 
        gain the trust of the Internet community,

Whereas these principles include transparent process, broad input into 
        policy-making, which must include meaningful individual 
        and non-commercial participation, and accountability (including 
        independent review of decisions),

Whereas there is a widespread perception that ICANN is moving away 
        from these principles, in particular by stalling or abandoning 
        processes for the implementation of an independent review 
        system and for participation of the Internet community at 
        large in ICANN oversight,

the General Assembly of the DNSO reminds the ICANN Board that it must
adhere to these principles in any reform proposal and make it 
sufficiently known how proposed reforms provide improvements regarding
these principles. Should the ICANN reform process fail to provide 
significant improvements in these regards, it is the international 
Internet community's and governments' task to consider how all of or 
parts of ICANN's responsibilities could be transferred smoothly to one 
or more new or existing organizations which are accountable to the 
international Internet community as a whole, have clearly defined 
missions and are not only under the sole control of a national 
department of commerce, without endangering the stability of the DNS 
or the Internet as a whole. In the meantime, all groups of the Internet 
community are 	called to deliver their input on reforms needed. 
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have read Joop's friendly amendment and thank him for it
(http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc10/msg01011.html).
The essence of Jamie's motion in my view is that it is
addressed directly to the US-DoC and only indirectly to ICANN
(which is also why some people have raised concerns about
its scope). The motion above is addressed to the ICANN
Board and in the case that the basic principles mentioned
above are not honored, calls on the *international* Internet
community and governments. Joop's amendment would change
this into an appeal which again goes to the US Department of
Commerce -- this goes against the intention of my original 
motion and I therefore prefer to keep the original motion
unchanged. (Of course it is also possible to offer an
additional motion!)

I have also received an email about the wording "without
endagering the stability of the DNS". I definitely understand
that people are tired of this phrase, but when we are even
considering moving the coordination of key Internet resources,
we should demonstrate that we are not only playing some game,
but are acting responsibly and have the stability of the DNS
in mind. I am of course aware that in a narrow technical
sense, we are talking about trivial keystrokes (e.g. 
switching DNS root servers within minutes), but on the other 
hand, we know that we are not talking about some purely 
technical switching here. That's why I included the phrase
even though it has definitely been used a couple of times
too often.

Thanks and best regards,
/// Alexander

- --
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 #1183
*************************