Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #254
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST         Wednesday, February 28 2001         Volume 01 : Number 254

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

Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:18:04 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] GA Chair

Hello Sotiropoulos,

Tuesday, February 27, 2001, 8:39:21 PM, Sotiropoulos wrote:

> I completely endorse Jeff Williams' condemnation
> of WXW's inappropriate personal attack on Eric
> Dierker.  There is no place for such tactics
> within the scope of our common purpose and work on
> this List.  

There was no personal attack involved at all.

I suggest you look up the meaning of the term.

I question the advisability of nominating someone for this position
who has shown not only a propensity (proven in fact by the record) but
also a total willingness to act in that fashion again (proven by his
own statement to that effect).

This is not a personal attack, and you know it.  When someone is put
up for this type of a position, it is entirely appropriate to discuss
their suitability for this position, and his own actions on this list
have made the questions about his suitability pertinent.

Don't like it?   Oh well.

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[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, 28 Feb 2001 01:27:23 -0500
From: "Joanna Lane" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [ga] GA Chair

Monday, February 26, 2001, 10:05:25 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:
>> I nominate Eric Dierker for GA Chair, and I hope
>> that someone will second this nomination ASAP.

> Seconded.

You have to be kidding.

The manner this person has displayed on this list is entirely
inappropriate for any candidate for chair and should prevent them from
even being under consideration.

- --
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[email-masked]

Hello William,
I disagree. For a start, all members of the GA should be under
consideration. That's the democratic way. Second, I cannot imagine Eric
Dierker ever referring to a colleague as "this person", or by any derogatory
term. That would be one good reason to consider his candidature seriously.
IMHO Eric has demonstrated consistency in a fair and even handed approach to
those with opposing viewpoints to his own, whilst having the courage to come
forward with well founded proposals based on a thorough understanding of the
issues through independent research. Added to that, I believe he is both
willing and able to take on the role and last but not least, he is nobody's
fool.
What exactly is your point?
Joanna

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

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

Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:45:02 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] GA Chair

Mr. Walsh,

It would be impossible for me to agree with you more.  To me this is the
most important post available to any netizen.  And I promise to uphold
your right, within bounds to speak your piece.  I want to represent the
good in this internet.  I am committed and so are my sponsors to see this
through.  If i fail to gain this post I will dedicate to assisting this
post.

I made an oath to meet your comments with positive.  And so I tell all
members that this week I will address 500 high school netizens and beg
their forgiveness in your place and then educate them on the beauty of
communicating with a shoe shine boy in southeast asia.

sincerely,

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello Sotiropoulos,
>
> Tuesday, February 27, 2001, 8:39:21 PM, Sotiropoulos wrote:
>
> > I completely endorse Jeff Williams' condemnation
> > of WXW's inappropriate personal attack on Eric
> > Dierker.  There is no place for such tactics
> > within the scope of our common purpose and work on
> > this List.
>
> There was no personal attack involved at all.
>
> I suggest you look up the meaning of the term.
>
> I question the advisability of nominating someone for this position
> who has shown not only a propensity (proven in fact by the record) but
> also a total willingness to act in that fashion again (proven by his
> own statement to that effect).
>
> This is not a personal attack, and you know it.  When someone is put
> up for this type of a position, it is entirely appropriate to discuss
> their suitability for this position, and his own actions on this list
> have made the questions about his suitability pertinent.
>
> Don't like it?   Oh well.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  William                            mailto:[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

- --
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, 27 Feb 2001 22:55:15 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] GA Chair

This type of flippant response just continues to show what I said.

Tuesday, February 27, 2001, 10:45:02 PM, Eric Dierker wrote:

> Mr. Walsh,

> It would be impossible for me to agree with you more.  To me this is the
> most important post available to any netizen.  And I promise to uphold
> your right, within bounds to speak your piece.  I want to represent the
> good in this internet.  I am committed and so are my sponsors to see this
> through.  If i fail to gain this post I will dedicate to assisting this
> post.

> I made an oath to meet your comments with positive.  And so I tell all
> members that this week I will address 500 high school netizens and beg
> their forgiveness in your place and then educate them on the beauty of
> communicating with a shoe shine boy in southeast asia.

> sincerely,

> "William X. Walsh" wrote:

>> Hello Sotiropoulos,
>>
>> Tuesday, February 27, 2001, 8:39:21 PM, Sotiropoulos wrote:
>>
>> > I completely endorse Jeff Williams' condemnation
>> > of WXW's inappropriate personal attack on Eric
>> > Dierker.  There is no place for such tactics
>> > within the scope of our common purpose and work on
>> > this List.
>>
>> There was no personal attack involved at all.
>>
>> I suggest you look up the meaning of the term.
>>
>> I question the advisability of nominating someone for this position
>> who has shown not only a propensity (proven in fact by the record) but
>> also a total willingness to act in that fashion again (proven by his
>> own statement to that effect).
>>
>> This is not a personal attack, and you know it.  When someone is put
>> up for this type of a position, it is entirely appropriate to discuss
>> their suitability for this position, and his own actions on this list
>> have made the questions about his suitability pertinent.
>>
>> Don't like it?   Oh well.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>  William                            mailto:[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

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[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: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:17:30 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] GA Chair

A promise is a Promise.
I did not mean to be flippant be any emeans.  I love this net.  I ask you Sr.
to address this most serious issue.
How do I make my daughters safe on the net?
And here is the promised +:  there are people who fall in love on the net.

Truth be told I would love to be in love.

Sincerely,

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> This type of flippant response just continues to show what I said.

- --
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, 27 Feb 2001 23:22:39 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Without shame running for the chair

I believe this represents the current status of nominations for chair.
Sotiris clearly had a second by Greg but has yet to accept, which he
should do promptly.  So I would suggest that you as the GA quickly get
someone who is acceptable by the NC or face the prospect of them
rejecting your nomination and appointing their own and making you vote
them into the chair by default.

You all know where I stand.  The GA if at all possible, over time, along
with the AT-LARGE(alm) should elect every voting board and council
member representative of this, our, corporation.  Who among us will not
bow our heads to the technical expertise of the men and women who know
that which is beyond us.  But as these great technical humanitarians
have always proclaimed, let us representatives of the netizens decide
the political/moral policies.  None of us social animals should make a
move without consulting our technical gurus.  The bummer is my guru has
declared us socialites a failure.  I apologize once more but promise to
do better with your help. I have an email from a shoe shine boy from a
developing country which better states my position, if you are
interested.

Ultreya,

       This appears to be the current status of  GA chair nominations.
Since no
       one else has accepted nomination, I will accept, and hope some
others do as
       well. If I've missed a response from anyone, I apologize in
advance for the
       oversight.

       >No response yet:
       >Roberto Gaetano
       >Barbara Simons
       >Emerson Tiller
       >Thomas Roessler
       >Eric Weisberg
       >Bret Fausett
       >Rod Dixon
       >Jeanette Hoffmann

       >Greg Burton - Accepted

       >Jonathan Weinberg - Declined
       >Michael Froomkin  - Declined
       >Harald Alverstrand - Declined
       >Alexander Svensson - Declined

       Regards,
       Greg

       References:
                 RE: [ga] Call for focus.....

       At 02:53 PM 2/13/01, Joop Teernstra wrote:
       >There is a seconded motion for a proposed nomination process by
Joanna
       >Lane, waiting for consideration by the Chair.

       Joop, I can't find that post of Joanna's in the ga list - she
made a motion
       in WG-Review, but I don't recall one being made in the GA.
Different list,
       eh? In the meantime, there is now less than two weeks til the NC
meets, and
       no one seems thrilled or eager to take the job on. I'll defer to
Roberto
       and not withdraw my acceptance, but....if I'm the only one
willing to chair
       the GA  things are in worse shape than I thought.

         Quite apart from that, given that someone has recently noted
what might
       appear to be a bug in the voting booth when someone changes their
vote, I
       wouldn't support the use of the voting booth until that's
resolved. As
       Harald indicated, there is no reason to not use the procedure the
GA has
       already developed - including the rules and method for voting
that has
       already been accepted.

       Regards,
       Greg

       Dear GA,

       The funding for travel to Melbourne that I hoped for has just
fallen
       through, so if attendance is a requirement for the chair, I'll
have to
       withdraw my acceptance of the nomination.

       My daughter thanks all of you for you sympathy and good wishes on
her
       injuries, as do I.

       Regards,
       Greg
- --
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, 28 Feb 2001 08:42:55 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [ADMIN] Note on inappropriate use of the complaint mechanism

There has been a regrettable tendency in recent weeks to have exchanges of 
the form:

A: "I think X"
B: "You must be out of your mind to think X"
C: "A has been personally attacked, and the monitor should silence B"
    (CC to [email-masked])

The discussion then deteriorates into a discussion about the monitor's
neutrality, the posters' personal morals and the list rules, often
forgetting all about the original claim X.

The moderator wishes to remind the participants that:

- - The monitor has, as a matter of personal choice, decided not to raise
   complaints about insults to himself on the GA list. As long as there is
   only one monitor, this limits his ability to address abusive postings
   of this particular type.

- - The Chair is free to appoint more monitors at any time.
   Thus, if neutrality of the monitor is in question, the right choice is
   to get someone perceived as more neutral to volunteer for the job.

- - The monitor is not required to react to all violations of the rules by
   imposing sanctions. When a reminder is enough, this is a much less
   disruptive measure.

- - The monitor occasionally sleeps, or does other things than reading the
   GA list. So the fact that a complaint has been raised does not mean that
   there will be an immediate reaction.

For the record, the monitor does not find that 
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc06/msg00506.html constitutes a 
personal attack.

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, [email-masked]
+47 41 44 29 94
Personal email: [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, 28 Feb 2001 08:54:54 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Without shame running for the chair

I think I have seen a decline from Roberto.

However, I think those who suggested the other names should take a 
responsibility for asking them; when I mentioned the nomination to Jeanette 
Hoffmann, this was the first she had heard about it.
(she also said she was too busy with the At Large to engage in the GA, btw)

At 23:22 27/02/2001 -0800, Eric Dierker wrote:

>        >No response yet:
>        >Roberto Gaetano
>        >Barbara Simons
>        >Emerson Tiller
>        >Thomas Roessler
>        >Eric Weisberg
>        >Bret Fausett
>        >Rod Dixon
>        >Jeanette Hoffmann
>
>        >Greg Burton - Accepted
>
>        >Jonathan Weinberg - Declined
>        >Michael Froomkin  - Declined
>        >Harald Alverstrand - Declined
>        >Alexander Svensson - Declined

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, [email-masked]
+47 41 44 29 94
Personal email: [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, 28 Feb 2001 04:56:44 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Note on inappropriate use of the complaint mechanism

Harald and all remaining assembly members,

  I appreciate your concern here, as it seems that it is at least in part
indirectly directed towards myself.  However, in all due candor,
I have a very few comments in reply to a couple of your points
here.  (See more below Haralds comments/points)

Harald Alvestrand wrote:

> There has been a regrettable tendency in recent weeks to have exchanges of
> the form:
>
> A: "I think X"
> B: "You must be out of your mind to think X"
> C: "A has been personally attacked, and the monitor should silence B"
>     (CC to [email-masked])

  I am guilty of "C".  I "CC'ed" [email-masked] as often such complaints
have gone unaddressed in the past, some long standing complaints still
remain unaddressed, as a matter of fact.

>
>
> The discussion then deteriorates into a discussion about the monitor's
> neutrality, the posters' personal morals and the list rules, often
> forgetting all about the original claim X.

  Very true.  And this has been the problem which was debated at length
by some past DNSO members.  Trying to codify "Morals" in a set of
rules, as with laws in government, is very problematic, if not impossible
as to their reasonable enforcement.

>
>
> The moderator wishes to remind the participants that:
>
> - The monitor has, as a matter of personal choice, decided not to raise
>    complaints about insults to himself on the GA list. As long as there is
>    only one monitor, this limits his ability to address abusive postings
>    of this particular type.
>
> - The Chair is free to appoint more monitors at any time.
>    Thus, if neutrality of the monitor is in question, the right choice is
>    to get someone perceived as more neutral to volunteer for the job.
>
> - The monitor is not required to react to all violations of the rules by
>    imposing sanctions. When a reminder is enough, this is a much less
>    disruptive measure.
>
> - The monitor occasionally sleeps, or does other things than reading the
>    GA list. So the fact that a complaint has been raised does not mean that
>    there will be an immediate reaction.
>
> For the record, the monitor does not find that
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc06/msg00506.html constitutes a
> personal attack.
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, [email-masked]
> +47 41 44 29 94
> Personal email: [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

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 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: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 05:01:49 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] NOT THE UDRP'S FINEST MOMENT (a repost from BNA Internet Law News)

All remaining assembly members,

An interesting and somewhat amusing (for the sarcastic and cynical among
us)
read:

The Register carries an interesting article on the recent
CelineDion.com decision in which the arbitrator appears to
have cut and paste the decision directly from an earlier
case involving the respondent.
 http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/17161.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 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: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 13:22:27 +0100
From: Robin Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] GA Chair

Joanna Lane wrote:

> What exactly is your point?

None, and there lies the problem. :) 

To be quite frank, I'm bored and a bit annoyed at the lack of concrete
progress. I'd like to see positive work done for individual domain holders both
present and future in regards to the UDRP and the issues regarding true
individual representation in the DNSO and ICANN. Nothing of consequence is
happening, except maybe a lot of the same old bashing that I've seen the entire
time I've been subbed to these various lists.

Little games like the ones going on in this thread go a long way in
perpetuating this problem. Every person that has tried to bring concrete
progress to these issues has had to suffer diatribes and personal attacks like
the ones going on in this thread. 

I personally don't care what others think a personal attack is - what I've seen
here in this thread would have been considered a violation by the TOS's I had
to follow when working for two different online services. These attacks go a
long way to driving average people away - since online services are in the
business of getting people to subscribe and stay online, you can imagine why
these rules are strictly enforced. Some people think that driving people away
might be the point of these attacks, but I tend to believe that its just to get
some kind of emotional kickback and no conspiracy theory is involved at all.

Now if I'm bored and annoyed at these games, what does that portend for the
majority that have no clue about ICANN or the DNSO? 

Complete apathy, I'm afraid. The average person is going to say 'what the ....'
and leave as soon as they came in. No average person with a life has the time
to put up with this garbage. I'm not talking only about this thread in
particular but the impression of the 715 mails I got while I was two weeks away
in the hospital - the majority of the mails both private and from lists came
from topics concerning ICANN and the GA, and their main topic was the
personality conflicts within. Yawn.

This problem is a serious issue and needs to be dealt with by every sane
individual on this list. If putting certain malcontents on your plonk file
makes your thinking clearer, I suggest wholeheartedly to start using it.
Certain individuals just live for the thrill of distraction and getting a rise
out of people and all you can do is not allow them to distract you. 

This is really just a general problem with certain kinds of online
personalities - its not something unique to the DNSO GA list. I'm sure a psych
student working on a doctorate would have a field day in here doing a theme
paper. I've seen this same syndrome happen on just about every mailing list,
every forum, every chatroom, every online service, and every message board I've
been on, the entire time I've been online. Which is close to 7 years by now.
Different people, same antics. Its amazing how the same things happen over and
over again.

That's all I have to say on this subject. I doubt if it makes any difference
anyway. But at least I've said it and I feel better for doing so. I guess
that's all that really matters.

back to lurking, Robin
- --
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, 28 Feb 2001 04:40:39 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] GA Chair

Hello Robin,

Wednesday, February 28, 2001, 4:22:27 AM, Robin Miller wrote:

> I personally don't care what others think a personal attack is - what I've seen
> here in this thread would have been considered a violation by the TOS's I had
> to follow when working for two different online services. These attacks go a
> long way to driving average people away - since online services are in the
> business of getting people to subscribe and stay online, you can imagine why
> these rules are strictly enforced. Some people think that driving people away
> might be the point of these attacks, but I tend to believe that its just to get
> some kind of emotional kickback and no conspiracy theory is involved at all.

There was no personal attack of any kind, and you are absolutely wrong
about any Online service that would consider it one.

Under your rules, anyone who disagrees with a nomination for an office
cannot post why they think that person is not suitable for the
position?

Under your rules, Robin, all of your posts critical of things inside
ICANN would be attacks that violate the supposed TOS's of these
online services you claim would characterize those posts as personal
attacks.

Sheesh.

Everyone is on this "personal attack" bandwagon, where anything said
about someone that they don't agree with was an attack.  This has gone
all the way up to include even our appointed moderator.  I was not
criticizing the person, I was criticizing his suitability for a
position for which he was nominated.  You may not like that some
people will take exception with someone you may like, and may point
out reasons why that person is not suited for a position of
leadership, but that doesn't make the criticism an inappropriate
personal attack.

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[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, 28 Feb 2001 04:54:10 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[4]: [ga] GA Chair

Hello Joanna,

Tuesday, February 27, 2001, 10:27:23 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:

> Hello William,
> I disagree. For a start, all members of the GA should be under
> consideration. That's the democratic way. Second, I cannot imagine Eric
> Dierker ever referring to a colleague as "this person", or by any derogatory
> term. That would be one good reason to consider his candidature seriously.
> IMHO Eric has demonstrated consistency in a fair and even handed approach to
> those with opposing viewpoints to his own, whilst having the courage to come
> forward with well founded proposals based on a thorough understanding of the
> issues through independent research. Added to that, I believe he is both
> willing and able to take on the role and last but not least, he is nobody's
> fool.
> What exactly is your point?

I think you must have this Eric confused with another.

"Fair and even handed" ?

Sorry, Joanna, but that one doesn't fly.  His own posts will evidence
that.  Read the archives.

Just because someone has made some constructive posts is not a basis
for saying they have the necessary leadership qualities to chair the
GA.  The balance of their exhibited behavior, not to mention the
stated commitment to similar actions in the future (which shows that
there is in fact no real remorse over those initial actions),
definitely overshadow anything else.

He can be a constructive member of the GA, and constructively offer
his proposals without being the GA Chair, a position for which he is
clearly unsuited.

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[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, 28 Feb 2001 08:10:22 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] GA Chair

WXW, Robin, and all remaining assembly members,

  IMHO, WXW's response to Robin here proves up Robin's point nicely,
however unfortunately....  A sad commentary indeed....  :(

William X. Walsh wrote:

> Hello Robin,
>
> Wednesday, February 28, 2001, 4:22:27 AM, Robin Miller wrote:
>
> > I personally don't care what others think a personal attack is - what I've seen
> > here in this thread would have been considered a violation by the TOS's I had
> > to follow when working for two different online services. These attacks go a
> > long way to driving average people away - since online services are in the
> > business of getting people to subscribe and stay online, you can imagine why
> > these rules are strictly enforced. Some people think that driving people away
> > might be the point of these attacks, but I tend to believe that its just to get
> > some kind of emotional kickback and no conspiracy theory is involved at all.
>
> There was no personal attack of any kind, and you are absolutely wrong
> about any Online service that would consider it one.
>
> Under your rules, anyone who disagrees with a nomination for an office
> cannot post why they think that person is not suitable for the
> position?
>
> Under your rules, Robin, all of your posts critical of things inside
> ICANN would be attacks that violate the supposed TOS's of these
> online services you claim would characterize those posts as personal
> attacks.
>
> Sheesh.
>
> Everyone is on this "personal attack" bandwagon, where anything said
> about someone that they don't agree with was an attack.  This has gone
> all the way up to include even our appointed moderator.  I was not
> criticizing the person, I was criticizing his suitability for a
> position for which he was nominated.  You may not like that some
> people will take exception with someone you may like, and may point
> out reasons why that person is not suited for a position of
> leadership, but that doesn't make the criticism an inappropriate
> personal attack.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  William                            mailto:[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

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 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: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:23:27 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Qualifications for GA Chair?

All remaining assembly members,

  I have the following questions for any and all of the GA Participants:

  What are the proper qualifications for the GA Chair nominations?
Where are they posted, if they exist?

Who, and under what conditions are proper qualifications developed?
What is the criterion for a good GA Chair?

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 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: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:05:54 -0600
From: Weisberg <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [Fwd: Thanks for the thought/Declined]

I am very proud to be mentioned in such company (below), but not
qualified.
Please move my name from group "A" to group "C."

>     This appears to be the current status of  GA chair nominations.
A.
       >No response yet:
       >Roberto Gaetano
       >Barbara Simons
       >Emerson Tiller
       >Thomas Roessler
       >Eric Weisberg
       >Bret Fausett
       >Rod Dixon
       >Jeanette Hoffmann

  B.
    >Greg Burton - Accepted

  C.
       >Jonathan Weinberg - Declined
       >Michael Froomkin  - Declined
       >Harald Alverstrand - Declined
       >Alexander Svensson - Declined
- --
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, 28 Feb 2001 10:10:00 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Qualifications for GA Chair?

Jeff Williams wrote:

>   I have the following questions for any and all of the GA Participants:
>
>   What are the proper qualifications for the GA Chair nominations?
> Where are they posted, if they exist?
>
> Who, and under what conditions are proper qualifications developed?
> What is the criterion for a good GA Chair?
>

100% commitment to the GA cause.  I mean this thusly;  Everything that comes
from working groups, the at large or the GA, not to mention the ccTLDs, gets
modified by the BoD or the NC. I mean watered down, it becomes spice less.
This is the nature of the ICANN animal.  Those of us in the WG-Review have
moderated our reports only to see them moderated further until they are
without substance.  I do not complain this fact because we are a consensus
body. But I recognize it.  Therefor our chair has to be 100% committed so as
to not water down the flavor from the GA kitchen.  This will require a tough
nut.

Sincerely,

- --
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, 28 Feb 2001 19:26:38 +0100
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Qualifications for GA Chair?

IMHO, Jeff Williams has the good questions. GA is not currently politically 
distributed/polluted. I think we should preserve that.

On 17:23 28/02/01, Jeff Williams said:
>All remaining assembly members,
>
>   I have the following questions for any and all of the GA Participants:
>
>  What are the proper qualifications for the GA Chair nominations?
>Where are they posted, if they exist?

I doubt they are as such. May be Roberto could enlight us on this?

>Who, and under what conditions are proper qualifications developed?
>What is the criterion for a good GA Chair?

Technically, the Chair of an assembly which should elect 47% of the BoD is 
a key person.  IMHO the real question is: do we want a Chair to manage the 
GA list so it may grow itself into a new vision, or do we want a  leader to 
impose on the BoD a new vision of the GA?

May be the candidates could tell us their own positions?
Jefsey

- --
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 #254
************************