Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1311
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Wednesday, July 3 2002           Volume 01 : Number 1311

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

Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 16:23:40 -0400
From: Sandy Harris <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [Fwd: FC: Salon interviews John Gilmore: "It's time for ICANN to go"]

( Note to Jeff Williams and perhaps others. 

  Commenting to this on the GA list may be useful. CCing a reply to half
  a dozen places as you did with the last message I forwarded almost
  certainly isn't. In particular, the politech list is moderated and 
  consists mainly of published material, or direct rebuttals by people
  criticiesd in published work. General discussion is out of scope.

  Please look at archives (www.politechbot.com) to see whether what you
  are sending would fit there before cc'ing either Declan or his list.)

- -------- Original Message --------
Subject: FC: Salon interviews John Gilmore: "It's time for ICANN to go"
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:31:54 -0400
From: Declan McCullagh <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]

Previous Politech message:
http://www.politechbot.com/p-02596.html

- ---

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/07/02/gilmore/index.html
   
   It's time for ICANN to go
   John Gilmore, original "cypherpunk" and all-around Internet supergeek,
   explains why the organization that runs the Internet is broken.
   
   - - - - - - - - - - - -
   By Damien Cave
   
   July 2, 2002  |  John Gilmore has spent 30 years shaping Internet
   culture and politics. An early employee of Sun Microsystems and a
   co-founder of free software pioneer Cygnus Software (now part of Red
   Hat), he has worked tirelessly to promote his civil-libertarian views
   on how cyberspace should evolve. Entities as diverse as the Electronic
   Frontier Foundation, the "cypherpunks" and Usenet's wacky and
   subversive "alt" newsgroups can all trace their roots to Gilmore's
   efforts -- and, quite often, his funding.
   
   Gilmore has never been afraid to speak his mind on any issue, but the
   politics of Internet governance are particularly close to his heart.
   And right now, that means keeping a close eye on ICANN, the Internet
   Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. ICANN is the international
   body in charge of managing the Internet's domain name system -- the
   numbers and names that identify Internet addresses.
   
   Critics from across the political spectrum have claimed for years that
   ICANN is secretive, slow, inefficient and, worst of all, firmly in the
   pocket of special interests. But in recent weeks, the rhetoric has
   gone up a notch. Suddenly, ICANN is at a crossroads.

   [...]

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

- --
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, 02 Jul 2002 19:00:38 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

Karl and all assembly members,

Karl Auerbach wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Denise Michel ALSC wrote:
>
> > At-Large Structures should:
> >
> > - Meet general criteria of openness, participation, and self-sustainability
>
> > - Engage in outreach to, and education of, individual Internet users about
> > ICANN and ICANN issues
>
> > - Involve individual Internet users, aggregate views, and identify relevant
> > Internet user priorities
>
> > - Solicit the opinions of their members on these issues
>
> > - Work with other ICANN stakeholders to address issues and develop positions
> > on Internet policy issues that fall within ICANN's mission.
>
> ICANN itself could not join as it fails to meet any, much less all, of
> these requirements.

  Agreed from what I can see in the cryptic and non supported
requirements.  However sense the ICANN BOD and staff
are evidently supporting this nonsense, of course they automatically
qualify...  Seems to me anyway to be a bad joke though...

>
>
>                 --karl--
>
> --
> 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 124k members/stakeholders 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

- --
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, 2 Jul 2002 22:23:50 -0400
From: "John Berryhill" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] If you thought the trademark people were interesting.....

...then wait until you meet the patent people:

These are published applications, not patents.  I boldy predict a small wave
of these:

Hello Enum, meet John Goodspeed:

- ----------
United States Patent Application 20020065828
Goodspeed, John D.  May 30, 2002
Network communication using telephone number URI/URL identification handle

Abstract
A method and device for enabling Internet users to communicate with one
another or access information more easily, without requiring lengthy,
hard-to-remember addresses. The method also enables personnel and resource
management by providing easily updated databases containing information
related to the resource or person of interest. By using an associated
telephone number associated with the person, or resource, as an Internet
address or URL, messages are sent, or access to information is enabled, by
routing the message or request for information to the appropriate location.
- ----------

Hello Registrars, "is your name taken" taken:

- ----------
United States Patent Application 20020065903
Fellman, Barry  May 30, 2002
Internet domain name registration system

Abstract
A system and method is disclosed for querying a database for multiple names
submitted at one time to a query server. The method includes a process for
querying a database, such as a domain name registry database, for multiple
names or text strings and displaying the query results for each of the names
in an easy-to-read table. In the disclosed embodiment of a domain name
registration system, a user is allowed to submit multiple names to a query
server to determine the availability of the names for domain name
registration. After the query results are returned for each of the multiple
names submitted, the user is presented with a table listing the availability
of each name in combination with multiple Top-Level Domain (TLD) extensions.
The user is able to select one or more names from the table for registration
in the registry database. After the query server has attempted to register
each of the selected names, the user is presented with a Registry Response
Table indicating which of the selected names were successfully registered as
domain names. Thus, the system and method increases the speed and
productivity of querying and updating a domain name registry or other
database.
- ----------

Hello new.net:

- -------
United States Patent Application 20020073233
Gross, William ;   et al.  June 13, 2002

Systems and methods of accessing network resources

Abstract
The present invention provides methods and systems for utilizing non-ICANN
compliant top-level domain (TLD) names. In one embodiment of the present
invention, client-based address conversion software is used to intercept a
requested Internet address having a non-ICANN compliant TLD. The address
conversion software then appends an extension, including at least an
ICANN-compliant TLD, to the end of an Internet address. Further, one
embodiment of the present invention is operable with proxy servers. In
addition, an email address conversion method and system is provided that
intercepts emails whose recipient address includes a non-standard TLD and
appends at least a standard TLD thereto. When an email is received,
including a sender's email address with a domain having a predetermined
ICANN compliant TLD, at least the predetermined TLD is stripped from the
sender's email address for display.
- ---------

John Berryhill
Patent Attorney

- --
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, 2 Jul 2002 19:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] If you thought the trademark people were interesting.....

John,

you are a Patent Attorney right? so, you understand the term "prior art"

- -rick (who is unimpressed)

On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, John Berryhill wrote:

>
> ...then wait until you meet the patent people:
>
>
> These are published applications, not patents.  I boldy predict a small wave
> of these:
>
> Hello Enum, meet John Goodspeed:
>
> ----------
> United States Patent Application 20020065828
> Goodspeed, John D.  May 30, 2002
> Network communication using telephone number URI/URL identification handle
>
>
> Abstract
> A method and device for enabling Internet users to communicate with one
> another or access information more easily, without requiring lengthy,
> hard-to-remember addresses. The method also enables personnel and resource
> management by providing easily updated databases containing information
> related to the resource or person of interest. By using an associated
> telephone number associated with the person, or resource, as an Internet
> address or URL, messages are sent, or access to information is enabled, by
> routing the message or request for information to the appropriate location.
> ----------
>
> Hello Registrars, "is your name taken" taken:
>
> ----------
> United States Patent Application 20020065903
> Fellman, Barry  May 30, 2002
> Internet domain name registration system
>
>
> Abstract
> A system and method is disclosed for querying a database for multiple names
> submitted at one time to a query server. The method includes a process for
> querying a database, such as a domain name registry database, for multiple
> names or text strings and displaying the query results for each of the names
> in an easy-to-read table. In the disclosed embodiment of a domain name
> registration system, a user is allowed to submit multiple names to a query
> server to determine the availability of the names for domain name
> registration. After the query results are returned for each of the multiple
> names submitted, the user is presented with a table listing the availability
> of each name in combination with multiple Top-Level Domain (TLD) extensions.
> The user is able to select one or more names from the table for registration
> in the registry database. After the query server has attempted to register
> each of the selected names, the user is presented with a Registry Response
> Table indicating which of the selected names were successfully registered as
> domain names. Thus, the system and method increases the speed and
> productivity of querying and updating a domain name registry or other
> database.
> ----------
>
> Hello new.net:
>
>
> -------
> United States Patent Application 20020073233
> Gross, William ;   et al.  June 13, 2002
>
> Systems and methods of accessing network resources
>
>
> Abstract
> The present invention provides methods and systems for utilizing non-ICANN
> compliant top-level domain (TLD) names. In one embodiment of the present
> invention, client-based address conversion software is used to intercept a
> requested Internet address having a non-ICANN compliant TLD. The address
> conversion software then appends an extension, including at least an
> ICANN-compliant TLD, to the end of an Internet address. Further, one
> embodiment of the present invention is operable with proxy servers. In
> addition, an email address conversion method and system is provided that
> intercepts emails whose recipient address includes a non-standard TLD and
> appends at least a standard TLD thereto. When an email is received,
> including a sender's email address with a domain having a predetermined
> ICANN compliant TLD, at least the predetermined TLD is stripped from the
> sender's email address for display.
> ---------
>
> John Berryhill
> Patent Attorney
>
> --
> 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, 02 Jul 2002 20:24:30 -0700
From: Gary Osbourne <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [Fwd: FC: Salon interviews John Gilmore: "It's time for ICANN to go"]

At 04:23 PM 02/07/02 -0400, Sandy Harris wrote:

>( Note to Jeff Williams and perhaps others.
>
>   Commenting to this on the GA list may be useful. CCing a reply to half
>   a dozen places as you did with the last message I forwarded almost
>   certainly isn't.

Jeff doesn't care. He's either an ICANN plant, or ICANN can
send him messages through his tinfoil hat, the more people
he cc's to (and bcc's to) the more he discredits independent
voices. He's been in my bozofilter for years. Most of those
posting to atlarge-discuss are similarily inflicted with
e-cholalia, and some of them are so terminally clueless they
haven't figured out how to get on the ICANN gravy train. -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: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:12:53 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Request to Establish a GA Transfers Research Group

On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:28:51 EDT, Danny Younger wrote:

> I need not remind you that the
> NC Transfers Task Force has accomplished nothing on transfers thus far in
> over 240+ days (other than arriving at a plan to waste even more time with a
> needless yet-to-be-released "survey").  The GA can get this work done in 45
> days.  We can act to end the abuse suffered by registrants at the hands of
> certain registrars.

Hi Danny

Perhaps you might consider using the .au ccTLD policies as a starting point
for what can be done without stress.  See, for example:

http://www.auda.org.au/policy/

Best regards
Patrick Corliss
_________________________________________________________
I'm on the Board of auDA (the .au country code).  Anything I write is my
personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect the views of any body
with which I am associated.  Please also note IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer).

- --
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, 3 Jul 2002 15:02:34 +0200
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Volunteers sought: WLS and Transfers.

On 2002-07-02 12:28:51 -0400, [email-masked] wrote:

>The Board has called for a policy-development process that "should 
>have a set time period, probably no longer than 30-45 days".  I  
>would like your assistance in proving that this can be done.

The point of policy-development in the DNSO context is to achieve  
consensus across constituencies.  If the constituencies (represented 
through the council) wish to work through a task force, it will be  
rather hard for the individual members of the GA to convince them  
otherwise.  In particular, the constituencies' representatives to  
the NC most likely wouldn't accept the outcome of a GA working group 
as "consensus" in the sense required by the process.

No, for the volunteers:

     It may still be a good idea to supplement Dan's good work on the 
     transfers task force by a "mirror working group" which could  
     help to bring perspectives into the discussion which may  
     currently not be sufficiently represented on the transfers task  
     force.  Note: This group would not be intended to replace the  
     task force's work, but to provide more diverse input to it.  
     Thus, participation means a lot of reading and a lot of work.

     If anyone's interested in participating in such a group, please  
     contact me OFF-LIST.

Finally, a word about the survey: It's non-obvious what kind of  
transfers policy is actually in the interest of registrants - a new  
Verisign customer (acquired due to their fake renewal notices) may  
quite well have preferred an Auto-NACK policy with the previous  
registrar, while someone else who is actually trying to transfer a  
domain name away from his current registrar may prefer Auto-ACK.  A  
survey may be a possible instrument to gather the necessary kind of  
information.

- -- 
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: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 08:03:40 -0500
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

At 12:50 PM 7/2/2002 -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Denise Michel ALSC wrote:
>
> > At-Large Structures should:
> >
> > - Meet general criteria of openness, participation, and self-sustainability
>
> > - Engage in outreach to, and education of, individual Internet users about
> > ICANN and ICANN issues
>
> > - Involve individual Internet users, aggregate views, and identify relevant
> > Internet user priorities
>
> > - Solicit the opinions of their members on these issues
>
> > - Work with other ICANN stakeholders to address issues and develop 
> positions
> > on Internet policy issues that fall within ICANN's mission.
>
>ICANN itself could not join as it fails to meet any, much less all, of
>these requirements.
>
>                 --karl--

Karl, I have noticed this as well.

I'm wondering, Denise, why none of the At-Large Participants have ever been 
notified about anything since the first election.  You are yours are truly 
taking advantage of the lack of free time most participants deal with by 
continuing to change the rules, invitations, and by not including everyone 
who went out of their way to be included.  Change your evil ways, you are 
transparent.

~k

- --
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, 3 Jul 2002 15:07:01 +0200
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] July 4, Cerf, Luxembourg - anyone going there?

If anyone of you is also going to attend Cerf's conference tomorrow  
afternoon in Luxembourg, please drop me a note off-list.

See also <http://www.isoc.lu/conferences>.

- -- 
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: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:34:17 +0200
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

On 2002-07-03 08:03:40 -0500, Kristy McKee wrote:

>I'm wondering, Denise, why none of the At-Large Participants have 
>ever been notified about anything since the first election.  You 
>are yours are truly taking advantage of the lack of free time most 
>participants deal with by continuing to change the rules, 
>invitations, and by not including everyone who went out of their 
>way to be included.  Change your evil ways, you are transparent.

Although some will probably take this as the reason for the next  
black helicopter theory: I don't believe that describing Denise's  
efforts as "evil ways" is appropriate in any way, Kristy.  She's not 
omnipotent - so she's most likely not able to get everything done  
within ICANN which she'd like to.  What she's doing is not about  
some ideal (like Karl's membership ideas), but about the things  
which are feasible within the current ICANN framework.

There's really no reason at all to assume that Denise is acting in  
bad faith.

- -- 
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: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:34:55 +0200
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Volunteers sought: WLS and Transfers.

On 2002-07-03 15:02:34 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:

>No, for the volunteers:

Hrmpf.  Make that "now", not "no".

>
>     It may still be a good idea to supplement Dan's good work on the 
>     transfers task force by a "mirror working group" which could  
>     help to bring perspectives into the discussion which may  
>     currently not be sufficiently represented on the transfers task  
>     force.  Note: This group would not be intended to replace the  
>     task force's work, but to provide more diverse input to it.  
>     Thus, participation means a lot of reading and a lot of work.
>
>     If anyone's interested in participating in such a group, please  
>     contact me OFF-LIST.

- -- 
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: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 16:15:34 +0200
From: "J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

- --=======151F63C6=======
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-54065CBA; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 15:34 03/07/02, Thomas Roessler said:
>There's really no reason at all to assume that Denise is acting in
>bad faith.

  I agree here. This is why we need to know and understand her. This is why 
I asked her her loyalties. She has taken much weight in the @large issue 
and yet we do not know anything from her own views. The only thing we can 
assume is that she shares views with the ALSC, ie positions which have been 
disapproved both by the @large community and by the BoD (I accept that was 
on different grounds and that we may have different definition of the 
@large community).

Also, she is paid by Esther through the ICANN. Does that mean that she 
shares with Esther or only reports to Stuart. I know it is not easy for her 
(the reason why this mail is not sent to her, so she may abstain) but I 
think that nevertheless it would be easier for her if we known.

jfc

- --=======151F63C6=======--

- --
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, 03 Jul 2002 11:42:41 -0500
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

Thomas, Jefsey, the reference to you and yours is a direct reference to 
ICANN, I apologize to those who use English as a second (or third or 
fourth) language as they may, like Thomas and Jefsey, not understand this.

Please allow me to restate more clearly:

I'm wondering, Denise,

WHY:  NONE OF THE AT-LARGE PARTICIPANTS HAVE EVER BEEN NOTIFIED ABOUT 
ANYTHING SINCE THE FIRST ELECTION.

WHY:  YOU AND YOURS ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE LACK OF FREE TIME MOST 
PARTICIPANTS DEAL WITH BY CONTINUING TO CHANGE THE RULES, INVITATIONS, AND 
BY NOT INCLUDING EVERYONE WHO WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY TO BE INCLUDED.

ICANN is transparent.

~k

At 03:34 PM 7/3/2002 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>On 2002-07-03 08:03:40 -0500, Kristy McKee wrote:
>
>>I'm wondering, Denise, why none of the At-Large Participants have ever 
>>been notified about anything since the first election.  You are yours are 
>>truly taking advantage of the lack of free time most participants deal 
>>with by continuing to change the rules, invitations, and by not including 
>>everyone who went out of their way to be included.  Change your evil 
>>ways, you are transparent.
>
>Although some will probably take this as the reason for the next
>black helicopter theory: I don't believe that describing Denise's
>efforts as "evil ways" is appropriate in any way, Kristy.  She's not 
>omnipotent - so she's most likely not able to get everything done
>within ICANN which she'd like to.  What she's doing is not about
>some ideal (like Karl's membership ideas), but about the things
>which are feasible within the current ICANN framework.
>
>There's really no reason at all to assume that Denise is acting in
>bad faith.
>
>--
>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

- --
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, 3 Jul 2002 09:59:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Karl Auerbach <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Thomas Roessler wrote:

> ...  What she's doing is not about  
> some ideal (like Karl's membership ideas), but about the things  
> which are feasible within the current ICANN framework.

A fully empowered, fully voting, at-large is quite feasible within ICANN.  

I can spend less than one dollar (US) and buy a share in Worldcom.  And 
that share gives me a right to vote and to obtain an annual statement 
from the company and to have other important rights.  And these rights 
exist as long as I own that share and as long as the company exists.

If Worldcom - and every other public company - can do this, then so can 
ICANN.

What we have here is a lack of will, not a lack of feasibility.
 
		--karl--

- --
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, 03 Jul 2002 13:07:57 -0700
From: Sandy Harris <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] "Moderating" the GA list.

Ellen Rony wrote:

> Moderation that inhibits crossposting and adhominem attacks is useful.  A
> mailing list may be moderated in other ways to reduce disruption without
> establishing a gatekeeper who makes judgment calls.  However, an approach,
> as described below, to decide what messages are considered "off topic" or
> "idle chatting" begins the slippery slope toward censorship and provides
> too much opportunity for bad judgment and abuse.

There are lots of other problems with moderation.

The moderator must at least glance at every message. This introduces
delay, especially if messages turn up at an odd hour for the moderator's
time zone, or on weekends. He or she may not see them for hours or days,
and they aren't resent until they're seen and approved.

When the moderator takes a week off, or is unavailable for some other
reason, the list hangs. What if the moderator is at an ICANN meeting?
That might be one of the most important times for list input, or for
reports from the meeting, but would the moderator have email access
and enough free time for moderation?

In any case, moderation entails a huge amount of work.
 
> Most readers of the list are astute enough to recognize blather, those
> messages wholly devoid of information or insightful comment.  We soon start
> deleting messages from the source of the noise, unread, and learn to resist
> any temptation to respond in kind.

Also, most mail clients support some form of filtering. It is trivially
easy to reject anything from a known idiot poster.
 
> Obvious spam is a separate issue. ...

There are a number of things that can be done in software. The big
questions about each of them is whether it's a good idea. Once we
decide that, worry about whether they're good enough to be worth
the trouble, and who is going to do the work.

Restrict posts to subscribers only. This eliminates most spam.

( A complication is that you should allow no-mail subscriptions.
  I read the list from this account, but I want to be able to
  forward messages here from another account; I may not be on
  this machine when I notice something interesting. The only
  way I can do that on a subscriber-only list is to subscribe
  the other account, but I need to be able to turn off list
  mail to it. Others may want to read the list via the archives
  but still be able to post.)

Enforce the 5 posts a day limit. I consider that limit silly,
but if we must have it, then doing it in software is the
only reasonable enforcement mechanism.

No HTML or, worse, .doc files. Perhaps even nothing but ASCII text,
though I'm not sure if that would trouble people from various
non-English=speaking countries.

No cross-posting.

Any of these are technically straightforward if we can agree
they're worth doing, someone wants to do the work, and the
list admins agree. 

I'd say subscriber-only and no weird formats are obviously
worthwhile.
- --
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, 3 Jul 2002 12:44:10 -0500
From: "John Palmer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

Karl, the problem I see here in this group is not the lack of desire for change, but the failure to recognize
that ICANN is a "rigged deal".

Folks here still think that if they make a good argument for some policy and if that policy makes
sense as far as the good of the internet goes, then ICANN will adopt it.

People just can't seem to understand that those in power at ICANN are there to further their own
agenda. That agenda is: 1) Maintaining their monopoly control over the most widely used root server
network in the world so that 2) Their for-profit interests (VSGN, Affilias, Neu{Star, Level}) can
continue to have a monopoly on TLD registries by continuing the artificial scarcity of domain names and
3) So that WIPO can continue to MISuse the DNS as a weapon to further its narrow interests.

No brilliant idea will "change their minds". They are not just sitting up there ignoring us because we
haven't had a bright idea yet or because they are skeptical, but because their agenda is not the same
as ours.

Once you come to the realization that they are up to no good by design, then you can only conclude
that there is one solution: Push the rotten edifice off a cliff by demanding a re-bid and lets make sure
we don't let them get away with it the next time.

Their claim that elections would be too difficult is a farce. The real reason is that elections would allow the
PEOPLE to remove the monopolists and other evil-doers from the board. They dont want this.

I've been reading Mueller's book and its sad. The once-free internet has been captured by a small group
of  people for a narrow special interest. Their broader interests are to make it like nothing more than TV -
a place where only a few really have the right to be visible (ie: to speak). IP addresses and Domain Names
are supposed to be managed for the benefit of all, but they are being managed to exclude as many people
as possible to the benefit of a few monopolists and media giants.

Its coming. Watch out.

In the mean time, you can use the Inclusive Namespace.. We've been here all along and aren't going
anywhere.

John

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Auerbach" <[email-masked]>
To: "Thomas Roessler" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Kristy McKee" <[email-masked]>; "Denise Michel ALSC" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; "jefsey"
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

> On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
> > ...  What she's doing is not about
> > some ideal (like Karl's membership ideas), but about the things
> > which are feasible within the current ICANN framework.
>
> A fully empowered, fully voting, at-large is quite feasible within ICANN.
>
> I can spend less than one dollar (US) and buy a share in Worldcom.  And
> that share gives me a right to vote and to obtain an annual statement
> from the company and to have other important rights.  And these rights
> exist as long as I own that share and as long as the company exists.
>
> If Worldcom - and every other public company - can do this, then so can
> ICANN.
>
> What we have here is a lack of will, not a lack of feasibility.
>
> --karl--
>
>
> --
> 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: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:45:05 -0400
From: "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] If you thought the trademark people were interesting.....

>
> you are a Patent Attorney right? so, you understand the term "prior art"

Yes.  But considering that, for brevity, I didn't post the pending claims,
the filing dates, and the priority dates, I'm not sure I see your point.  I
simply think people should be aware that these things are in the pipeline.

Whether you are fighting an invalid patent or a valid one, the money you
spend is going to be the same color.

- --
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, 3 Jul 2002 04:29:01 -0700
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 11:42:41AM -0500, Kristy McKee wrote:
> Thomas, Jefsey, the reference to you and yours is a direct reference to 
> ICANN, I apologize to those who use English as a second (or third or 
> fourth) language as they may, like Thomas and Jefsey, not understand this.
> 
> Please allow me to restate more clearly:
> 
> I'm wondering, Denise,
> 
> WHY:  NONE OF THE AT-LARGE PARTICIPANTS HAVE EVER BEEN NOTIFIED ABOUT 
> ANYTHING SINCE THE FIRST ELECTION.

They were notified.  A mass mailing to all participants in the at-large 
election was sent, notifying them of the work of the atlarge study, and 
inviting them to participate.

> WHY:  YOU AND YOURS ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE LACK OF FREE TIME MOST 
> PARTICIPANTS DEAL WITH BY CONTINUING TO CHANGE THE RULES, INVITATIONS, AND 
> BY NOT INCLUDING EVERYONE WHO WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY TO BE INCLUDED.

Huh?

- -- 
Kent Crispin, Technical Systems Manager, ICANN            [email-masked]
"Be good, and you will be lonesome."  -- Mark Twain       [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: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 17:46:16 -0400
From: James Love <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] At-Large

Kent, what are the benefits one gets from joining the Esther/Denise 
at-large.org effort?  Can they elect their own leaders or make *any* 
decisions?    Jamie

Kent Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 11:42:41AM -0500, Kristy McKee wrote:
> 
>>Thomas, Jefsey, the reference to you and yours is a direct reference to 
>>ICANN, I apologize to those who use English as a second (or third or 
>>fourth) language as they may, like Thomas and Jefsey, not understand this.
>>
>>Please allow me to restate more clearly:
>>
>>I'm wondering, Denise,
>>
>>WHY:  NONE OF THE AT-LARGE PARTICIPANTS HAVE EVER BEEN NOTIFIED ABOUT 
>>ANYTHING SINCE THE FIRST ELECTION.
> 
> 
> They were notified.  A mass mailing to all participants in the at-large 
> election was sent, notifying them of the work of the atlarge study, and 
> inviting them to participate.
> 
> 
>>WHY:  YOU AND YOURS ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE LACK OF FREE TIME MOST 
>>PARTICIPANTS DEAL WITH BY CONTINUING TO CHANGE THE RULES, INVITATIONS, AND 
>>BY NOT INCLUDING EVERYONE WHO WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY TO BE INCLUDED.
> 
> 
> Huh?
> 

- -- 
- ------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:[email-masked]
voice: 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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1311
*************************