Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #328
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Saturday, March 31 2001           Volume 01 : Number 328

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:09:02 -0500
From: "Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga] Re: (6)  What's In It For Me?  -  Jeff Williams

- ---- Original Message -----
From: William X. Walsh
> Hello Sotiropoulos,
>
> Friday, March 30, 2001, 11:41:43 PM, Sotiropoulos wrote:
>
> > Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> >> Patrick, [no CC list]
> >> plese calm down.
> >>
> >> You have spammed the list with 5 separate messages that were copies of
a
> >> private conversation. If you want to post private mail to the list,
please
> >> at least take the time to do so in a rational manner.
>
> > At least we now know that Patrick Corliss supports Jeff Williams'
condition
> > on personal privacy and its prerogatives...
>
> We know no such thing.  Patrick clearly refuted "Jeff"'s "conditions"
> and demands.  Any chair candidate who supports those "conditions" and
> demands is doomed, btw.

William, please... I was just poking a little fun.  Where's your sense of
humour?  In truth, I stand for list rules and moderation.  Jeff Williams'
proposals are as off the wall as his fictional Bob Davis persona...  I know
Patrick is not in support of Jeff Williams' ideas, and I hope none of the
other candidates are.

Sincerely,

SS

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:16:21 -0500
From: "Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST

- ---- Original Message -----
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
> I am sorry but I have not seen anything about the man JW.  Where I come
from a man
> who stands for nothing will fall for anything.

Especially someone who's a favourite among the "old guard" so to speak...
Please, Mr. Weinberg, let us know why we (or I as an individual) should
consider voting for you?

> It seems as though Mr, Corliss stands for himself, regardless of
affiliations.

Yes, that's pretty clear.

> If this seems rude I apologize but are we just supposed to know Jonathan?

Seems kind of odd, huh?  esp. if he wins...

> And no I do not want to hear from his friends and I do not want to hear
his past,
> but since he does not contribute I want to hear his ideas.

Me too.

> Keep in mind this is from someone that was kept from being a candidate by
Mr.
> Alternative Chair.

Truly unfortunate!! this sort of thing must stop!  I did not hear Jon
Wienberg's opinion on this situation... but I sure would like too.

> He does not contribute to this list so Who is he?, He did not attend
Melbourne, and
> he is not a member of the WG-Review. I have not seen his name mentioned in
> establishing an@large.  Yet he got the endorsements necessary. JW help me
out here,
> who are you? You never know I may love you, but being a super secret
candidate is
> hard on us.

Considering the amount of "super-secret" stuff that goes on in ICANN, this
sort of thing should not surprise anyone, especially if he wins (without a
word)!

Mr. Weinberg... are you there?

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Individual

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:14:56 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Function and quality of GA Chair- (was RE: Re[2]: [ga] Top Level  Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST)

After reading Mr. Corliss' post it dawned on me that all of what is said here is
a good idea, but don't think for a minute that that means someones integrity can
be established without currently placing some comments on the list so that we
can currently evaluate his integrity.  The idea that "he is good because we say
so" is not a good idea at all.
Mr. Corliss and Mr. Younger are active and we know where they stand and how they
act today, I would like the same respect from any other candidate.

Sincerely,

Peter de Blanc wrote:

> William, your "GA Chair" comments are excellent, and deserve re-inforcement.
> Everyone on this list would do well to keep this in mind. The position of
> "Chair" is a consensus-building responsibility. Necessary abilities include
> ability to prioritize an agenda based on inputs from the group, manifest
> diplomacy in all dealings, and, most importantly, put aside one's personal
> viewpoints while managing discussion.
>
> Qualifications also include enough experience in participating in lists so
> that the person is able to recognize and divert the tendancy to participate
> in "flame wars" and other diversions.
>
> Once Integrity of the potential candidate is established to the satisfaction
> of the voting member, further evaluation should proceed along the guidelines
> William has so succiently set out.
>
> Peter de Blanc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of William
> X. Walsh
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 4:38 AM
> To: Eric Dierker
> Cc: Harald Tveit Alvestrand; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> babybows.com; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF
> INTEREST
>
> Hello Eric,
>
> Saturday, March 31, 2001, 2:56:49 AM, Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> > I am sorry but I have not seen anything about the man JW.  Where I come
> from a man
> > who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
>
> Eric, if you don't know who he is, then perhaps you need to take into
> account how new you are to the process, and that maybe you should look
> into more than just the events in few months that the At-Large has
> been around, which brought many "newbies" such as yourself to the process.
>
> I do not mean the term as derogatory, btw, I hope you understand
> that, I too was once a "newbie" to the domain policy arena, some 5
> years ago.
>
> > It seems as though Mr, Corliss stands for himself, regardless of
> affiliations.
>
> The GA Chair will need to stand for the GA, not for himself or his
> affiliations.  A GA chair is not elected for his VIEWS on the issues,
> but for his ability to help build consensus and to advocate that
> consensus to the NC, which is his primary role.  A good GA chair's
> views will be irrelevant.  Roberto is a perfect example of that. His
> past affiliation with CORE was a point that many people considered
> very carefully, but in his selection, most of us felt that as a
> person, Roberto's ability to work with diverse people in reaching
> compromise, and his ability to stay out of the more intense fray's,
> not to mention his integrity, were vastly more important than "where
> is stood" on various issues, such as non-profit "public trust"
> management of TLDs, and other issues were I and others have disagreed
> with him.
>
> A good Chair will not be elected for his views, but will be elected
> DESPITE his views.
>
> > If this seems rude I apologize but are we just supposed to know Jonathan?
>
> No, I gave a reason why I endorsed him.  Unlike many others, I take my
> endorsement seriously, and believe that when you endorse someone, you
> should state why you are doing so, so that others may benefit from it,
> or discount it as they see fit.
>
> > Keep in mind this is from someone that was kept from being a candidate by
> Mr.
> > Alternative Chair.
>
> You were not kept from being a candidate by anyone, Eric.
>
> --
> 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

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:30:46 -0500
From: "Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST

William X. Walsh wrote:
> Hello Eric,
>
> Saturday, March 31, 2001, 2:56:49 AM, Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> > I am sorry but I have not seen anything about the man JW.  Where I come
from a man
> > who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
>
> Eric, if you don't know who he is, then perhaps you need to take into
> account how new you are to the process, and that maybe you should look
> into more than just the events in few months that the At-Large has
> been around, which brought many "newbies" such as yourself to the process.

William,

Since I began my invovlement in ICANN there have been may "newbies",
including yourself... I don't see your name on the Boston meeting List:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/cambridge-1198/attendees.html  Roberto
gaetano is there and so are some of the others... but your characterization
of Eric as a "newbie" is like the pot calling the kettle black in my
opinion.  William, in comparison to some of us you're a "newbie", but so
what?  In fact, none of the current candidates are listed for the Boston
Meeting in '98, should we consider all of them "newbies"?  Please William,
drop the characterizations.

Thanks,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Individual

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Individual

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 19:37:27 +0200
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Updated ICANN site

Folks,

With all the traffic these days I don't remember if anybody has already 
posted about the update in ICANN web pages on the VeriSign contract 
(http://www.icann.org/melbourne/info-verisign-revisions.htm).

In particular, see the DNSO input 
(http://www.icann.org/melbourne/dnso-input-verisign-revisions-28mar01.htm) 
that includes reports from constituencies and GA.

There is also another letter from VeriSign 
(http://www.icann.org/melbourne/verisign-submission-29mar01.htm).

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 20:03:04 +0200
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Function and quality of GA Chair- (was RE: Re[2]: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST)

Eric,

>Mr. Corliss and Mr. Younger are active and we know where they stand and how 
>they
>act today, I would like the same respect from any other candidate.
>

I understand your point.
Nevertheless I tend not to judge the candidates in an election only on what 
they say in the few weeks before and during it, but like to check the 
activities (and the successes) on a longer period of time.

The WG-C has been one of the major fights of the last years, as it had to 
set the foundations for the introduction of new TLDs. The person that 
skillfully managed the consensus in that working group gets wide support 
even if for his reasons (that I do not know) at the moment he is not 
particularly active on this forum.

Of course, there may be facts about the other candidates that we don't know: 
achievements that may let us think that they will be successful in fostering 
consensus in this difficult environment, rather than expressing a specific 
point of view. If this is the case, I think it will be useful to know them, 
as I maintain that, in all elections, it is dangerous to judge the 
candidates only from the promises during the campaign.

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

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

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

Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 04:08:32 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Role of GA Chair

Hi Peter

Thank you for your kind reminder of the role of the GA Chair.  I'm sure that
your comments are appreciated by all members of the list.  You wrote:

> William, your "GA Chair" comments are excellent, and deserve re-inforcement.
> Everyone on this list would do well to keep this in mind. The position of
> "Chair" is a consensus-building responsibility. Necessary abilities include
> ability to prioritize an agenda based on inputs from the group, manifest
> diplomacy in all dealings, and, most importantly, put aside one's personal
> viewpoints while managing discussion.

But there's much more, some of which you've touched on below.

Roberto, and Harald, have worked very hard over an extended period just managing
day to day activities of the list.  When a major task, activity or project comes
along, the workload becomes intense.  Unfortunately that seems to be a common
occurrence.

But more important than hard work, even, is honour and integrity.  I am a
professional as are many others on the list.  We behave professionally.  The
standards expected of the Chair include being truthful and not misrepresenting
people's views, acting impartially in decision-making and behaving ethically and
with integrity.

> Qualifications also include enough experience in participating in lists so
> that the person is able to recognize and divert the tendancy to participate
> in "flame wars" and other diversions.

I agree with your sentiments especially as people may often try to derail a
legitimate process or just cause confusion.  Others, who may be
well-intentioned, often divert the debate into all sorts of side-alleys and
dead-ends.  The Chair must guide us all.

However, the Chair does have the advantage of a list monitor and a rule-book.
Not all decisions are ad hoc requiring patience, judgment and wisdom.  The Chair
can also call upon the members to participate in the process through discussion
and voting.

It was with great regret, therefore, that I made several postings which might be
seen as less than decorous.  I apologise to any member who felt it was
inappropriate.  My reasoning was clear.  The election process requires the
utmost trust.  Some of us have seen what happens with electoral interference in
an online environment.  After the debate on potential conflict of interest, I
felt that the best course was disclosure.  The privacy rule was waived.

> Once Integrity of the potential candidate is established to the satisfaction
> of the voting member, further evaluation should proceed along the guidelines
> William has so succiently set out.

Little mention was made yesterday of the fact that I am on the Board of auDA,
the body endorsed by the Australian government as the .au ccTLD.  I am also
trying to develop a project which I believe will have a significant impact of
the internet itself.  These sorts of conflicts will be normal for any candidate.

For example, my experience with a ccTLD will have an influence.  However, I
intend to work towards a fair balance in all of my dealings.  I hope I have
demonstrated honesty and integrity as well as transparency.  If elected, I will
serve to the best of my ability with a mature and sensible approach.

I have the experience you ask on lists and elsewhere.  I thank you again.

Yours faithfully
Patrick Corliss

> Peter de Blanc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of William
> X. Walsh
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 4:38 AM
> To: Eric Dierker
> Cc: Harald Tveit Alvestrand; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> babybows.com; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF
> INTEREST
>
>
> Hello Eric,
>
> Saturday, March 31, 2001, 2:56:49 AM, Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> > I am sorry but I have not seen anything about the man JW.  Where I come
> from a man
> > who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
>
> Eric, if you don't know who he is, then perhaps you need to take into
> account how new you are to the process, and that maybe you should look
> into more than just the events in few months that the At-Large has
> been around, which brought many "newbies" such as yourself to the process.
>
> I do not mean the term as derogatory, btw, I hope you understand
> that, I too was once a "newbie" to the domain policy arena, some 5
> years ago.
>
> > It seems as though Mr, Corliss stands for himself, regardless of
> affiliations.
>
> The GA Chair will need to stand for the GA, not for himself or his
> affiliations.  A GA chair is not elected for his VIEWS on the issues,
> but for his ability to help build consensus and to advocate that
> consensus to the NC, which is his primary role.  A good GA chair's
> views will be irrelevant.  Roberto is a perfect example of that. His
> past affiliation with CORE was a point that many people considered
> very carefully, but in his selection, most of us felt that as a
> person, Roberto's ability to work with diverse people in reaching
> compromise, and his ability to stay out of the more intense fray's,
> not to mention his integrity, were vastly more important than "where
> is stood" on various issues, such as non-profit "public trust"
> management of TLDs, and other issues were I and others have disagreed
> with him.
>
> A good Chair will not be elected for his views, but will be elected
> DESPITE his views.
>
> > If this seems rude I apologize but are we just supposed to know Jonathan?
>
> No, I gave a reason why I endorsed him.  Unlike many others, I take my
> endorsement seriously, and believe that when you endorse someone, you
> should state why you are doing so, so that others may benefit from it,
> or discount it as they see fit.
>
> > Keep in mind this is from someone that was kept from being a candidate by
> Mr.
> > Alternative Chair.
>
> You were not kept from being a candidate by anyone, Eric.
>
>
> --
> 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
>

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 10:11:25 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[4]: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Hello Sotiropoulos,

Saturday, March 31, 2001, 9:30:46 AM, Sotiropoulos wrote:

> William X. Walsh wrote:
>> Hello Eric,
>>
>> Saturday, March 31, 2001, 2:56:49 AM, Eric Dierker wrote:
>>
>> > I am sorry but I have not seen anything about the man JW.  Where I come
> from a man
>> > who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
>>
>> Eric, if you don't know who he is, then perhaps you need to take into
>> account how new you are to the process, and that maybe you should look
>> into more than just the events in few months that the At-Large has
>> been around, which brought many "newbies" such as yourself to the process.

> William,

> Since I began my invovlement in ICANN there have been may "newbies",
> including yourself... I don't see your name on the Boston meeting List:
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/cambridge-1198/attendees.html  Roberto

Attendance at physical meetings does not mean that someone was not
participating, Sotiris.

> gaetano is there and so are some of the others... but your characterization
> of Eric as a "newbie" is like the pot calling the kettle black in my
> opinion.  William, in comparison to some of us you're a "newbie", but so
> what?  In fact, none of the current candidates are listed for the Boston
> Meeting in '98, should we consider all of them "newbies"?  Please William,
> drop the characterizations.

Sotiris, I stand by it.  It was not a negative comment, and it was
accurate.  It does not describe me, however.  As I said, my
participation goes back many years now.

- -- 
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: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 04:13:53 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Thank You

Hi Sotiropoulos

You wrote:

> William, please... I was just poking a little fun.  Where's your sense of
> humour?  In truth, I stand for list rules and moderation.  Jeff Williams'
> proposals are as off the wall as his fictional Bob Davis persona...  I know
> Patrick is not in support of Jeff Williams' ideas, and I hope none of the
> other candidates are.

I'll use up one of my five postings to thank you for your kindness in making
that clear to others on the list who might have misunderstood.  I appreciate
your post.

Thank you
Patrick Corliss

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 10:13:19 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] DNSO Constituency Structure

Hello Patrick,

Saturday, March 31, 2001, 8:01:39 AM, Patrick Corliss wrote:

> On Saturday, March 31, 2001 4:58 AM (AEST)
> Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Subject: RE: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST

>> I might point out that this was suggested before and is something that the
>> ICANN BoD is proven to be steadfastly against. Although, Karl Auerbach is
>> one of the original supporters of such a flexible constituency model

> It seems that I agree with Karl in relation to much of what he proposes ;-).

Karl is not in a position where he is called to co-ordinate and lead a
group towards consensus, and to advocate that consensus, above his own
views, however.  In his role, personal views are vastly more important
than they are here.

- -- 
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: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 13:18:26 -0500
From: "Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] "newbies"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0078_01C0B9E5.11FB38E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It has been brought to my attention that I have erred with my appraisal =
of the duration of WXW's participation in ICANN.  Well, let me just say =
that over the years, I have been more of an observer than participant, =
mostly because I was busy trying to learn all I could about the issues =
and the matters involved in ICANN and its formation. I hope that's OK =
with all of you?  But, if you were to search some of the past forum =
boards, you will find my name, just like you do for the Boston Meeting =
in '98.  I've not been on many of the previous MLs as I preferred to =
take an outsider's look in.   Not everyone speaks up who watches... this =
List is good evidence of that.  To be honest, I came forward into the =
"limelight" so
to speak, after years of "doing my homework" because the disgust I felt =
drove me to do so.  So, I may not have crossed paths with Mr. Walsh... I =
do not recall having done so, just as I've never heard of many of you =
till now. =20

In any case, I was responding to the dismissive characterization of Eric =
as a "newbie", so I hope this clears the air.  The last thing any =
"newbies" need to hear is that sort of comment!  However, I do apologize =
to William for not knowing of his existence until quite recently.  =
Although, some might not consider this a disadvantage, I will simply say =
that direct participation in ICANN is a luxury for many, one that I have =
not had too much time for in the past.  Even though many people are =
interested in what goes on in ICANN, not all of them have the time or =
energy to be direct participants.  But, I know for a fact that many ARE =
watching.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Individual

- ------=_NextPart_000_0078_01C0B9E5.11FB38E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">It has been =
brought to my=20
attention that I have erred with my appraisal of the duration of WXW's=20
participation in ICANN.&nbsp; Well, let me just say that =
</FONT></FONT>over the=20
years, I have been more of an observer than participant, mostly because =
I was=20
busy trying to learn all I could about the issues and the matters =
involved in=20
ICANN and its formation. I hope that's OK with all of you?&nbsp; But, if =
you=20
were to search some of the past forum boards, you will find my name, =
just like=20
you do for the Boston Meeting in '98.&nbsp; I've not been on many of the =

previous MLs as I preferred to take an outsider's look in.&nbsp;&nbsp; =
Not=20
everyone speaks up who watches... this List is good evidence of =
that.&nbsp; To=20
be honest, I came forward into the "limelight" so<BR>to speak, after =
years of=20
"doing my homework" because the disgust I felt drove me to do so.&nbsp; =
So, I=20
may not have crossed paths with Mr. Walsh... I do not recall having done =
so,=20
just as I've never heard of many of you till now.&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In any case, I was responding to the dismissive characterization of =
Eric as=20
a "newbie", so I hope this clears the air.&nbsp; The last thing any =
"newbies"=20
need to hear is that sort of comment!&nbsp; However, I do apologize to =
William=20
for not knowing of his existence until quite recently.&nbsp; Although, =
some=20
might not consider this a disadvantage, I will simply say that direct=20
participation in ICANN is a luxury for many, one that I have not had too =
much=20
time for in the past.&nbsp; Even though many people are interested in =
what goes=20
on in ICANN, not all of them have the time or energy to be direct=20
participants.&nbsp; But, I know for a fact that many ARE watching.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Sincerely,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Sotiris Sotiropoulos</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
</FONT><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman">Individual</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0078_01C0B9E5.11FB38E0--

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 10:38:25 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: Function and quality of GA Chair- (was RE: Re[2]: [ga] Top Level Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST)

Hello Roberto,

Saturday, March 31, 2001, 10:03:04 AM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Eric,

>>Mr. Corliss and Mr. Younger are active and we know where they stand and how 
>>they
>>act today, I would like the same respect from any other candidate.
>>

> I understand your point.
> Nevertheless I tend not to judge the candidates in an election only on what 
> they say in the few weeks before and during it, but like to check the 
> activities (and the successes) on a longer period of time.

Yes, personally, I feel any candidate that feels a need to "campaign"
for the position is probably not the kind of candidate needed for that
position.

I've said much the same about a similar position in the IDNO.

- -- 
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: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 13:51:03 -0500
From: "Sotiropoulos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Thank You

Patrick Corliss wrote:
> Hi Sotiropoulos
>
> You wrote:
>
> > William, please... I was just poking a little fun.  Where's your sense
of
> > humour?  In truth, I stand for list rules and moderation.  Jeff
Williams'
> > proposals are as off the wall as his fictional Bob Davis persona...  I
know
> > Patrick is not in support of Jeff Williams' ideas, and I hope none of
the
> > other candidates are.
>
> I'll use up one of my five postings to thank you for your kindness in
making
> that clear to others on the list who might have misunderstood.  I
appreciate
> your post.

Patrick, I will use up my last post to the List to reply.

I am happy to see that you did not jump to take offense, and that you've
still got some humour left, despite much of the atmosphere of late.  Let me
say that I am glad to see your candidacy in this vote for GA Chair and
Co-Chair, even though we have never met.  I have read all your posts with
great interest, and I find much of what you say to be quite reasonable.

I wish you and all the candidates the best of luck in the election.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
        Individual

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

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

Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 13:52:22 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Function and quality of GA Chair- (was RE: Re[2]: [ga] Top Level  Domain Association - NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST)

As long as this is not an excuse not to participate OK.  But lack of current
participation is still the issue.  Stop trying to change the subject, please.  I
am not talking about yesterday or for a few weeks at a time, but when it is
important.  OTOH maybe it is not important to some people, but then what kind of
- ----- is that?

Sincerely,

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello Roberto,
>
> Saturday, March 31, 2001, 10:03:04 AM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>
> > Eric,
>
> >>Mr. Corliss and Mr. Younger are active and we know where they stand and how
> >>they
> >>act today, I would like the same respect from any other candidate.
> >>
>
> > I understand your point.
> > Nevertheless I tend not to judge the candidates in an election only on what
> > they say in the few weeks before and during it, but like to check the
> > activities (and the successes) on a longer period of time.
>
> Yes, personally, I feel any candidate that feels a need to "campaign"
> for the position is probably not the kind of candidate needed for that
> position.
>
> I've said much the same about a similar position in the IDNO.
>
> --
> 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: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 20:53:33 +0200 (MET DST)
From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Vote by the GA - preferences for a Chair and an Alternate Chair

GA Members,

Starting today, 31 March 2001, the members of GA Voting Registry 
are voting to advise the Names Council of its preferences
for a Chair and an Alternate Chair to the General Assembly.

The Basic Outline of the Election Process has been sent out
to the members of GA Voting Registry, followed by individual
ballots.

The adopted Election Rules state:
    Voting is secret; only the secretariat and the watchdogs get to
    see the votes.
The members to the Watchdog Committee in 2001 election are: 
    * Roberto Gaetano 
    * Harald Alvestrand 
    * Kent Crispin 
    * Dany Vandromme 
    * Alexander Svensson 
    * Izumi Aizu 

The attached is a schedule and a summary of the ongoing vote.

DNSO Secretariat

[ To: [email-masked], [email-masked] ]
[ To: [email-masked] ]

[ cf. http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.GA-chair-election-ranking.html ]

ICANN/DNSO 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

DNSO General Assembly 
Vote by the GA to advise the Names Council of its preferences 
for a Chair and an Alternate Chair to the General Assembly
b04 

31 March 2001

Vote by the GA to advise the Names Council of its preferences 
for a Chair and an Alternate Chair to the General Assembly

Four candidates determined in Nominations-Acceptances-Endorsements 
process http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.DNSO-GAchair.html 

Listed in order of acceptances: 
    * Danny Younger 
    * Eric Hugh Dierker 
    * Jonathan Weinberg 
    * Patrick Corliss 

Basic outline of Vote by the GA to advise the Names Council 
of its preferences for a Chair and an Alternate Chair to the 
General Assembly

    * Basic outline 
      http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.GA-b04-outline.html 

Electorate and Voting Registry 

    * Electorate. Voting roster 
      http://www.dnso.org/secretariat/b04rosterindex.html, 
      as of 31 March 2001, at the time the ballot was sent out. 
    * Voting Registry 
      http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-voting-registry.html 

Election Rules used by the DNSO General Assembly 

    * Election rules 
      http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.GA-chair-election-rules-v0.2.html 

Time for the vote

    * Begins: Saturday 31 March 2001, 16:00 UTC, 18:00 CET (Paris), 
      (8:00 LA, 11:00 New York, 18:00 Paris, 01:00 next day Tokyo) 
    * Ends: Saturday 7 April 2001, 16:00 UTC, 18:00 CET (Paris) 
      (9:00 LA, 12:00 New York, 18:00 Paris, 01:00 next day Tokyo) 

Results -- to be published on 8 April 2001, 22:00 UTC, 24:00 Paris.

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Information from:© DNSO GA's Chair

- --
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 #328
************************