Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1681
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST             Friday, May 2 2003             Volume 01 : Number 1681

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

Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 11:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why hasn't ICANN acknowledged it?

Hello,

- --- "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]> wrote:
> If that leaves you scratching your head, then you have not had your
> eye on
> the ball, and probably still believe the propaganda about WLS pricing
> floated
> by certain folks here last year.

Indeed.

I'm amazed that Dotster's letter *still* hasn't been posted at:

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/

It was dated April 9, 2003. We do have Louis Touton's correspondences
to the GNSO dated April 8th and April 11th posted. I see another
correspondence by Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi dated April 23rd. We even have
a couple of posts to/fron Danny Younger in late March 

I find it hard to fathom why a contracted party such as Dotster has a
lower priority of responsiveness from ICANN than Danny Younger! (with
all due respect to Danny) Perhaps something ICANN will need to explain
to an arbiter or judge one day, should the issue of 'good faith' crop
up....

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.AutoInsurance.ca/
- --
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: Thu, 1 May 2003 14:56:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why hasn't ICANN acknowledged it?

What are inclusive and ccTLDs doing regarding such things.
I would like to know what WS, UK, AU, LA, US do with such matters.
Leah and Joe and Jim probably have different policies.
If one country has a better mousetrap, let us shift. Good for that country.
Adding two digits is easy.
Of course I read the funny paper called a newspaper and dotcoms are still 
bombing. we must adapt.  .COM is toast.  Yes they still have a data base but 
there have been more expiries than registrations in the last few months.

These monoliths called Verisign and other Registrars are not developing.
Customers want service and there is none in the dotbomb arena.
Watch as services become more developed and consumer oriented and community 
based.

Eric Dierker

> Hello,
> 
> --- "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> If that leaves you scratching your head, then you have not had your
>> eye on
>> the ball, and probably still believe the propaganda about WLS pricing
>> floated
>> by certain folks here last year.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> I'm amazed that Dotster's letter *still* hasn't been posted at:
> 
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/
> 
> It was dated April 9, 2003. We do have Louis Touton's correspondences
> to the GNSO dated April 8th and April 11th posted. I see another
> correspondence by Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi dated April 23rd. We even have
> a couple of posts to/fron Danny Younger in late March 
> 
> I find it hard to fathom why a contracted party such as Dotster has a
> lower priority of responsiveness from ICANN than Danny Younger! (with
> all due respect to Danny) Perhaps something ICANN will need to explain
> to an arbiter or judge one day, should the issue of 'good faith' crop
> up....
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> http://www.AutoInsurance.ca/
> --
> 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: Thu, 1 May 2003 16:35:14 -0500
From: "John Palmer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why hasn't ICANN acknowledged it?

I can't speak for the ccTLDs or all INS tlds, but for INRS (Inclusive Namespace Registry System)
TLDs, the rule is that an expired domain hangs around for 60 days after it expires and is then
deleted. This isn't a complicated matter. No WLS needed. 
- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Dierker" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 16:56
Subject: Re: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why hasn't ICANN acknowledged it?

> What are inclusive and ccTLDs doing regarding such things.
> I would like to know what WS, UK, AU, LA, US do with such matters.
> Leah and Joe and Jim probably have different policies.
> If one country has a better mousetrap, let us shift. Good for that country.
> Adding two digits is easy.
> Of course I read the funny paper called a newspaper and dotcoms are still 
> bombing. we must adapt.  .COM is toast.  Yes they still have a data base but 
> there have been more expiries than registrations in the last few months.
> 
> These monoliths called Verisign and other Registrars are not developing.
> Customers want service and there is none in the dotbomb arena.
> Watch as services become more developed and consumer oriented and community 
> based.
> 
> Eric Dierker
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > --- "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >> If that leaves you scratching your head, then you have not had your
> >> eye on
> >> the ball, and probably still believe the propaganda about WLS pricing
> >> floated
> >> by certain folks here last year.
> > 
> > Indeed.
> > 
> > I'm amazed that Dotster's letter *still* hasn't been posted at:
> > 
> > http://www.icann.org/correspondence/
> > 
> > It was dated April 9, 2003. We do have Louis Touton's correspondences
> > to the GNSO dated April 8th and April 11th posted. I see another
> > correspondence by Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi dated April 23rd. We even have
> > a couple of posts to/fron Danny Younger in late March 
> > 
> > I find it hard to fathom why a contracted party such as Dotster has a
> > lower priority of responsiveness from ICANN than Danny Younger! (with
> > all due respect to Danny) Perhaps something ICANN will need to explain
> > to an arbiter or judge one day, should the issue of 'good faith' crop
> > up....
> > 
> > Sincerely,
> > 
> > George Kirikos
> > http://www.AutoInsurance.ca/
> > --
> > 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
> 
> 
> 
- --
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: Thu, 01 May 2003 19:14:42 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why hasn't ICANN acknowledged it?

But John, the whole point is not to keep it simple. WLS adds another level
to the marketing chest, generating squillions of dollars at the poor
Registrants expense, right?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of John
> Palmer
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 5:35 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why hasn't
> ICANN acknowledged it?
>
>
> I can't speak for the ccTLDs or all INS tlds, but for INRS
> (Inclusive Namespace Registry System)
> TLDs, the rule is that an expired domain hangs around for 60 days
> after it expires and is then
> deleted. This isn't a complicated matter. No WLS needed.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric Dierker" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 16:56
> Subject: Re: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why
> hasn't ICANN acknowledged it?
>
>
> > What are inclusive and ccTLDs doing regarding such things.
> > I would like to know what WS, UK, AU, LA, US do with such matters.
> > Leah and Joe and Jim probably have different policies.
> > If one country has a better mousetrap, let us shift. Good for
> that country.
> > Adding two digits is easy.
> > Of course I read the funny paper called a newspaper and dotcoms
> are still
> > bombing. we must adapt.  .COM is toast.  Yes they still have a
> data base but
> > there have been more expiries than registrations in the last few months.
> >
> > These monoliths called Verisign and other Registrars are not developing.
> > Customers want service and there is none in the dotbomb arena.
> > Watch as services become more developed and consumer oriented
> and community
> > based.
> >
> > Eric Dierker
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > --- "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > >> If that leaves you scratching your head, then you have not had your
> > >> eye on
> > >> the ball, and probably still believe the propaganda about WLS pricing
> > >> floated
> > >> by certain folks here last year.
> > >
> > > Indeed.
> > >
> > > I'm amazed that Dotster's letter *still* hasn't been posted at:
> > >
> > > http://www.icann.org/correspondence/
> > >
> > > It was dated April 9, 2003. We do have Louis Touton's correspondences
> > > to the GNSO dated April 8th and April 11th posted. I see another
> > > correspondence by Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi dated April 23rd. We
> even have
> > > a couple of posts to/fron Danny Younger in late March
> > >
> > > I find it hard to fathom why a contracted party such as Dotster has a
> > > lower priority of responsiveness from ICANN than Danny Younger! (with
> > > all due respect to Danny) Perhaps something ICANN will need to explain
> > > to an arbiter or judge one day, should the issue of 'good faith' crop
> > > up....
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > George Kirikos
> > > http://www.AutoInsurance.ca/
> > > --
> > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> --
> 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: Thu, 01 May 2003 19:43:39 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FW: reminder for Nominations

It now seems that individual At Large users are struggling to reach
participation levels in double figures. If this is what ICANN can produce
over 3 years of effort, from a base number of 70,000+ grass roots
supporters, a budget of $millions, and an unequivocal remit to foster user
participation....well...I'd say the evidence points to a resounding failure
....anybody care to dispute that?

Regards,
Joanna

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 7:27 PM
> Subject: reminder for Nominations

> So far only 17 members have participated in the pre-nomination
> poll or have made their nominations in the Forum.
> http://www.icannatlarge.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=22
> For the elections to proceed it is important that all members who
> want to nominate get the chance.
>
> A reminder generally doubles the number of participants.
>
> Those who have not done so yet, please proceed to
> http://www.pollingbooth.info, log in with your password below and
> tick the names you might think worthy of nomination.
>
> New Topic.
> There is also a new topic on the Polling Booth on your preference
> for our mailing list. (with Rules or without rules)
>
>
> The Booth closes on May 4, so please take the opportunity now.
>
> As always, if you do not want to receive Polling messages or
> reminders, please email me and I will remove you from the list.
>
> -joop-

- --
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: Thu, 1 May 2003 20:30:21 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

The Nominations for ICANN Board seat 13 closed on Wednesday 30 April at 17:00 
UTC.

Alejandro Pisanty confirmed to the Secretariat that his nomination should be 
taken into consideration for seat 13, yet apparently no one bothered formally 
nominate him for Seat #13. 

This prompted the Secretariat on the last day of nominations to unilaterally 
declare that "Indeed your nomination will be carried over".
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/icann-nominations/Arc04/msg00003.html

Meanwhile, the one and only actual nomination put forth was for Adam Peake 
from the NCUC --  see http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/icann-nominations/Arc04/

Let's see how all of this will be spinned into a victory for Pisanty who 
wasn't even formally nominated on the list.... any bets?
- --
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: Thu, 1 May 2003 20:40:29 -0400
From: "John Berryhill" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Dotster's latest letter to ICANN re: WLS -- Why hasn't ICANN acknowledged it?

Joanna Lane
>
> But John, the whole point is not to keep it simple. WLS adds another level
> to the marketing chest, generating squillions of dollars at the poor
> Registrants expense, right?

At the registrants' expense?  No.  If you want to be a domain name
registrant, you register your name, you pay your renewals, and you remain a
happy camper for a couple of bucks a year.

The games that I enjoy watching develop from out here in the cheap seats
have little to do with that.

WLS is simply a new Verisign monopoly product that will make money from
people who want to play the expiring domain name game.  It has been sold as
being "fairer" than the current game by people who are either tremendously
naive or stand to profit from it.  It's not "fairer" - it is simply
"different".  There will be winners and there will be losers.  Today's
losers think changing the rules will make them winners.  Tomorrow's losers,
who may very well be the same people, will come to believe that WLS is not
"fair".

Think of it as your landlord running a betting pool on whether you pay your
rent next month, and in which the marketability of the pool provides your
landlord with something of an interest in you not paying it.  It doesn't
really affect your status as a tenant... as long as you pay your rent.

The other interesting spectator sport here is that Dotster's Namewinner
service, and others, have been eating SnapNames' lunch.  SnapNames tries to
sell SnapBacks as a kind of "domain insurance" that will protect you from
your own stupidity in opting to try to remember to pay an annual renewal,
instead of maxing out the full term, for domains that are important to you.
The problem is that quite a few SnapBack holders have found out that it
doesn't always work.

So, rather than face up to the facts of life and human experience as they
relate to allocation systems for unique resources, the "solution" is to
pretend there has been a socialist revolution in the world and to have
people wait in line for these resources.  The real goof here is the magical
thinking that leads folks to believe that the people who used to beat them
to the watering hole will not also find ways to beat them to the line for
the watering hole.  In fact, if you look at the experience with SnapBacks,
and the figures posted here long ago by the venerable Mr. Gomes, there is a
factual basis to believe that is exactly what will happen with WLS, despite
the propaganda to the contrary.

But we know to a certainty who some of the losers will be if WLS is
implemented, and one of them will be Dotster.  This is what Dotster has
earned by creatively developing a model to compete effectively with
SnapNames, and by not having the right connections within that colorful
parade of exotic entertainment we call ICANN.

The problem with Dotster's "we'll sue ICANN" approach is that Dotster's
legal folks have obviously not sat down with copies of United States
Published Patent Application Nos. 20020091827 and 20020091703.

WLS is just one of two strategies being pursued to make this a monopoly
service.  If the folks in Oregon have gotten favorable action by now on
their patent applications, then the urgency of gettting WLS off the ground
may wane a bit.

And if anyone at SnapNames still reads this list, they might ask the kind
folks at Stoel Rives about 35 USC 102(a) and 37 CFR 1.56.  Because those
folks who know durn well where to find the section 102(a) evidence are going
to become very popular with Dotster in the future.

If you liked the trademark people, you will LOVE the patent people.  They
are slower to show up, but much more devastating when they arrive.

But to answer your question.  No.

- --
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, 02 May 2003 13:00:34 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FW: reminder for Nominations

At 11:43 a.m. 2/05/2003, Joanna Lane wrote:
>It now seems that individual At Large users are struggling to reach
>participation levels in double figures. If this is what ICANN can produce
>over 3 years of effort, from a base number of 70,000+ grass roots
>supporters, a budget of $millions, and an unequivocal remit to foster user
>participation....well...I'd say the evidence points to a resounding failure
>....anybody care to dispute that?

Joanna,

1. ICANN is not "producing" this  effort to organize the signed-up 
icannatlarge (.com .org) members.  If fact ICANN has nothing to do with us 
and is spending its money on Denise Michel organizing its own "ALAC"  (as a 
substitute?)
You are barking up the wrong tree.

2.You are taking participation figures in the middle of a Nomination 
exercise, not at the close.   Walsh used to do that too...

3. Nomination of candidates, when candidates are not well known, is not 
something every member wants to do. You could also have said that only 2 
people have sent Nominations to the atlarge-discuss mailing list!  But if 
the lists of nominees by those 2 are long, few people may want to add to them.

4. People who keep on shouting "failure" prematurely and in the wrong 
direction  are helping to sabotage the effort to organize independently.

5. Did *you* make any nominations already? You can do so in the public 
Forum http://www.icannatlarge.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=22

Or do you no longer want to be listed as icannatlarge member because the 
'icann" string is still there and in spite of your effort as Panel Chair, 
you were unable to excise it?

- -joop-

- --
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: Thu, 1 May 2003 23:55:13 -0400 
From: "Neuman, Jeff" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

Danny, 

At this GNSO meeting on April 17th, it was decided that any qualifying
candidate from the election for seat 14 would automatically be a candidate
for seat 13 if they so desired.  Alejandro stated that he did in fact wish
to be in the race, but Philip and Barbara declined.  Barbara would not have
been eligible for the seat however, even if she wanted because she is from
North America.  See
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc12/msg00250.html

In my view, Alejandro did not need to be nominated separately.  That is not
spin, but the truth. In addition, I have been following the NCUC discussion
and Mr. Peake has declined his nomination.  I am not sure if this has
changed since his last posting.  

Danny, there is no conspiracy here.

Jeff 

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 8:30 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

The Nominations for ICANN Board seat 13 closed on Wednesday 30 April at
17:00 
UTC.

Alejandro Pisanty confirmed to the Secretariat that his nomination should be

taken into consideration for seat 13, yet apparently no one bothered
formally 
nominate him for Seat #13. 

This prompted the Secretariat on the last day of nominations to unilaterally

declare that "Indeed your nomination will be carried over".
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/icann-nominations/Arc04/msg00003.html

Meanwhile, the one and only actual nomination put forth was for Adam Peake 
from the NCUC --  see
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/icann-nominations/Arc04/

Let's see how all of this will be spinned into a victory for Pisanty who 
wasn't even formally nominated on the list.... any bets?
- --
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: Thu, 1 May 2003 23:54:33 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Announce list for 76,000+ At-Large members

Vittorio,

At-Large members were originally told that they would automatically be 
subscribed to the At-Large announce list upon their membership activation:

"The applicant will be automatically subscribed to the At Large email 
announcement list when his/her membership is activated." 
http://members.icann.org/rules.html

"over 76,000 applicants activated their memberships prior to the September 8 
deadline."
http://www.icann.org/committees/at-large/at-large.htm

Will the ALAC be sending announcements to this list of 76,000+ names?

- --
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, 2 May 2003 00:04:01 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

Re:  << there is no conspiracy here. >>

Elections with only one candidate are fitting for Soviet-style totalitarian 
government -- but I guess that's what this self-perpetuating Board is turning 
into anyway.  Enjoy your Pyrrhic victory.
- --
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, 02 May 2003 15:18:01 +0900
From: Adam Peake <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

Correct, I have no wish to be nominated.

(The nomination
<http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/icann-nominations/Arc04/msg00004.html>
does not follow the template so I'd guess invalid?)

Jeff, you're on the names council, could you find out why the process
for seat 13 has been so lacking. GNSO website looks like we're still
celebrating Michael Palage (congratulations and good luck to him) rather
than considering seat 13, which looks as though it's still planned. Not good.

Thanks,

Adam

"Neuman, Jeff" wrote:
> 
> Danny,
> 
> At this GNSO meeting on April 17th, it was decided that any qualifying
> candidate from the election for seat 14 would automatically be a candidate
> for seat 13 if they so desired.  Alejandro stated that he did in fact wish
> to be in the race, but Philip and Barbara declined.  Barbara would not have
> been eligible for the seat however, even if she wanted because she is from
> North America.  See
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc12/msg00250.html
> 
> In my view, Alejandro did not need to be nominated separately.  That is not
> spin, but the truth. In addition, I have been following the NCUC discussion
> and Mr. Peake has declined his nomination.  I am not sure if this has
> changed since his last posting.
> 
> Danny, there is no conspiracy here.
> 
> Jeff
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 8:30 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?
> 
> The Nominations for ICANN Board seat 13 closed on Wednesday 30 April at
> 17:00
> UTC.
> 
> Alejandro Pisanty confirmed to the Secretariat that his nomination should be
> 
> taken into consideration for seat 13, yet apparently no one bothered
> formally
> nominate him for Seat #13.
> 
> This prompted the Secretariat on the last day of nominations to unilaterally
> 
> declare that "Indeed your nomination will be carried over".
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/icann-nominations/Arc04/msg00003.html
> 
> Meanwhile, the one and only actual nomination put forth was for Adam Peake
> from the NCUC --  see
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/icann-nominations/Arc04/
> 
> Let's see how all of this will be spinned into a victory for Pisanty who
> wasn't even formally nominated on the list.... any bets?
> --
> 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
- --
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, 02 May 2003 15:29:53 +0900
From: Adam Peake <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

Danny, 

See <http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc12/msg00250.html> item 4
on the agenda. If that's not clear listen to the MP3 recording. The
council agreed the process of allowing the unsuccessful candidates for
seat 14 (except Barbara Simons -- geographic diversity) have their
nominations go forward to seat 13.

Of course Alejandro's a legitimate candidate.

Thanks,

Adam

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Re:  << there is no conspiracy here. >>
> 
> Elections with only one candidate are fitting for Soviet-style totalitarian
> government -- but I guess that's what this self-perpetuating Board is turning
> into anyway.  Enjoy your Pyrrhic victory.
> --
> 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: Fri, 2 May 2003 07:31:32 +0100
From: "Richard Henderson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

The ICANN Board has no credibility.

Re-introduce the one-person-one-vote election of At Large representatives.

Insist on an independent ombudsman.

...

Richard Henderson

- ----- Original Message -----
From: <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 5:04 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Adam Peake elected to Board?

> Re:  << there is no conspiracy here. >>
>
> Elections with only one candidate are fitting for Soviet-style
totalitarian
> government -- but I guess that's what this self-perpetuating Board is
turning
> into anyway.  Enjoy your Pyrrhic victory.
> --

- --
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,  2 May 2003 09:45:15 +0300
From: Webcop Dude <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] RRP?

Hello..anyone here working directly with RRP? 

Thanks
WebDude

- ---
This message contains no viruses. 
Guaranteed by Kaspersky Anti-Virus.
www.antivirus.lv

- --
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: Thu, 1 May 2003 23:57:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] RRP?

On Fri, 2 May 2003, Webcop Dude wrote:

> Hello..anyone here working directly with RRP?

yes, what do you want to know about it?

- -rick

- --
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, 02 May 2003 10:29:03 +0200
From: Vittorio Bertola <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Announce list for 76,000+ At-Large members

On Thu, 1 May 2003 23:54:33 EDT, you wrote:

>Vittorio,
>
>At-Large members were originally told that they would automatically be 
>subscribed to the At-Large announce list upon their membership activation:
>
>"The applicant will be automatically subscribed to the At Large email 
>announcement list when his/her membership is activated." 
>http://members.icann.org/rules.html
>
>"over 76,000 applicants activated their memberships prior to the September 8 
>deadline."
>http://www.icann.org/committees/at-large/at-large.htm
>
>Will the ALAC be sending announcements to this list of 76,000+ names?

Danny,

whether to send out announcements and how to build an announcement
list has not been finally considered yet by the Committee, but Denise
already pointed out on this list that those 76'000 persons were
contacted by the ALSC asking whether they would like to receive
further announcements, and about 5'000 of them signed on. So I guess
that we'll send our announcements to these 5'000 people if we decide
to send out any. I don't think we'll try to contact the other 71'000,
first of all because they didn't opt in to further announcements and
so I think that we are not authorized to contact them again(*), and
also because a 3-year-old list of e-mail addresses is not going to be
very useful. But of course comments and opinions on this are welcome.

(*) Actually, it might be illegal under many national privacy
regulations.
- -- 
vb.                  [Vittorio Bertola - vb [at] bertola.eu.org]<---
- -------------------> http://bertola.eu.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: Fri, 2 May 2003 08:08:09 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] 0:242     SHOP...Monday 05/05/03

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_01D5_01C31081.F830F710
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
0:242     SHOP
=================
http://www.iahc.org/press/press-final.html
"SEVEN NEW TOP LEVEL DOMAIN NAMES ARE ADDED FOR INTERNET ADDRESSES AND UP TO 28 NEW REGISTRARS PLANNED"
http://www.iahc.org/draft-iahc-recommend-00.html
Final Report...
http://www.gtld-mou.org/docs/iahc.html
"Modification of the gTLD .store to .shop following a public request for comments reviewing the chosen names"

http://new.chat.new.net/viewtopic.php?t=118
DAY 10 (Monday 05/05/03) 
.SHOP 
=================
Registrars...
http://www.easyspace.com/
http://www.BulkRegister.com
http://www.RegisterFly.com
http://www.DollarDomainName.com
http://www.thepricedomain.com/

http://new.chat.new.net/viewtopic.php?t=165
            Below are a sample of expired .SHOP domains scheduled to be released Monday May 5, 2003: 

            videogame.shop 
            candle.shop 
            accessory.shop 
            reise.shop 
            alpha.shop 
            homebrew.shop 
            yahoo.shop 
            strategy.shop 
            bid.shop 
            record.shop 
            247.shop 
            cell.shop 
            itv.shop 
            specialty.shop 
            search.shop 
            jewellery.shop 
            technology.shop 
            discount.shop 
            florist.shop 
            name.shop 
            shoppingcart.shop 
            photo.shop 
            websitedesign.shop 
            girls.shop 
            digital.shop 
            jewerly.shop 
            jewelery.shop 
            camel.shop 
            msn.shop 
            artsandcrafts.shop 
            bakery.shop 
            coke.shop 
            bikini.shop 
            collector.shop 
            digicam.shop 
            motorcycle.shop 
            condom.shop 
            download.shop 
            closeout.shop 
            apparel.shop 
            videogames.shop 
            drugstore.shop 
            palm.shop 
            magic.shop 
            hot.shop 
            dreamcar.shop 
            brasil.shop 
            condoms.shop 
            privacy.shop 
            sun.shop 
            entertainment.shop 
            jeweler.shop 
            property.shop 
            gladys.shop 
            suv.shop 
            africa.shop 
            bmw.shop 
            mercedes.shop 
            liquor.shop 
            cheap.shop 
            stpats.shop 
            rugs.shop 
            binoculars.shop 
            teen.shop 
            furniture.shop 
            guitar.shop 
            windsurf.shop 
            lingerie.shop 
            big.shop 
            herbs.shop 
            vegetarian.shop 
            cdr.shop 
            apple.shop 
            ozarkcrafts.shop 
            world.shop 
            sewing.shop 
            sweat.shop 
            vw.shop 
            cellphone.shop 
            bulbs.shop 
            abath.shop 
            lightbulb.shop 
            thegolf.shop 
            polka.shop 
            boys.shop 
            dkny.shop 
            bananarepublic.shop 
            bowling.shop 
            israeltravel.shop 
            eyedoctors.shop 
            stamp.shop 
            skiing.shop 
            snack.shop 
            onestop.shop 
            light.shop 
            webdomains.shop 
            eyedoctor.shop 
            brazil.shop 
            golfshirts.shop 
            smile.shop 
            gucci.shop
            ====================================================================== 

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
0:242     SHOP

- ------=_NextPart_000_01D5_01C31081.F830F710
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="spacer.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Location: http://a117.g.akamai.net/7/117/3136/200305011327/www.new.net/images/spacer.gif

R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAP///////yH5BAUUAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAICRAEAOw==

- ------=_NextPart_000_01D5_01C31081.F830F710--

- --
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 #1681
*************************