Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #551
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Tuesday, June 19 2001            Volume 01 : Number 551

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 22:00:14 -0400
From: "Danny Younger" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Asking Patrick to take over for a while

Dear members,

I expect to be out-of-touch for a short while, and I am asking Patrick
Corliss to take over as Chair of this Assembly until I can resume my duties.

My website is down.  It was hosted by a company that was bought by another
web-hosting firm.  This particular host was later purchased by yet another
company (ISP/Web-hosting provider), which has apparently decided not to
honor the existing web-hosting service contracts, and has chosen to
decommission the servers rather than migrating the accounts to new servers.
This will result in a disruption to my email services, as well as the need
to quickly rebuild my site at another location.

I will be attending to this personal/financial/business need and hope to be
able to return to this forum soon.

In the interim, private email messages may be sent to me at the following
address:  [email-masked]

Best regards,
Danny Younger

- --
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: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:41:49 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Delay

Hello DPF,

Monday, June 18, 2001, 6:31:40 PM, DPF wrote:
> I suggest to get around this we have a slightly less informal election
> than for ga-chair.  This is an appt that Danny could make himself but
> instead he has chosen to let the GA vote on.

> Firstly the electoral college should just be the current [email-masked]
> (and ga-full automatically) subscribers.  That one ballot paper can be
> sent to the mailing list and that is it.

The issue is with authenticity, as Elizabeth quite correctly points
out.

Kent had written an email ballot system I believe that can handle
this, and deals well with the same "authenticity" issue.

And if I remember correctly (it's been quite a while) it handles the
tabulating automatically.  I don't recall if it can do the kind of
auditing by unique ballot numbers that the system the secretariat
developed does.  If not, I'm sure this is an easy add-on.  The
auditing report is a necessary requirement to avoid charges of the
host of the system from tampering.

I don't know how long it would take to get setup with Kent's system or
to modify it to do the auditing reports, but we should look into this
quite soon.  Then we just need a location to host it (which is not
that big of an issue because of the auditing, any number of us with
the resources can do it gratis).

> A voting address should be provided which goes to a couple of
> scrutineers.  I would suggest Michael Froomkin and Kent Crispin if
> they are willing.  if those two agree on the vote count we can be sure
> it is correct :-)

> The ballot paper will have a list of nominees and people vote for the
> person they want.  The e-mail must be sent from the an address which
> is subscribed to [email-masked].  The person voting will also receive
> back a confirmation of how they voted so this stops anyone voting on
> behalf of someone else without their knowledge.

> We open nominations for a week and have voting for a week so we should
> get a result in just over two weeks.

In the interim, until we can get an "independent" system that won't
require going to the secretariat or the council everytime we need to
run a simple vote, we should just do what David is suggesting.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

- --
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: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 22:28:54 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Delay

Danny and all assembly members,

  The reference (URL) you provided does not indicate what the nature of the
delay is.  Do you know what that delay is due to?  If not, is it possible
for the GA start the nomination process here?  Please advise.  If so,
why not just call for nominations now?

Danny Younger wrote:

> Dear members,
>
> Please be advised that we have encountered an unexpected delay regarding the
> nomination of a GA representative to the NC's Review Task Force.
>
> The explanation for such delay may be found at
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc05/msg00473.html
>
> I would appreciate any comments, thoughts, suggestions on this topic.
>
> --
> 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: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 17:50:30 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Posting Rules - Call for a VOTE

- --On 17. juni 2001 07:56 -0700 "William X. Walsh" 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> Can it Patrick.  You already lost this debate. It was thought by you
> and Danny, no one else.
>

and me. I also think offering a ga-rules list was a Good Thing.
Note that I consider it an *offer*, not an *order*.

- --
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, 19 Jun 2001 01:08:45 -0600
From: "Earl Heather" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

only thing offensive here is the obvious bias of those involved in this 
decision

Eric's posts must have been hitting too close to home.

> The list monitors have decided to suspend Eric Dierker's
> posting rights for four weeks, beginning today (Monday,
> 18 June) until Monday, 16 July.
> 
> We have received several complaints about postings by
> Eric Dierker; our decision is based on the personal attacks
> and insults in
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html and
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02077.html as well

.................
- --
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, 19 Jun 2001 13:42:28 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

Dear Interim Chair,
We have a been certain number here rereading the incriminated Eric's mails. 
I really fail to see what was hurting in the first mail ending with the 
author's best loves, and I accept - as the author says it - the second is 
lyric, but I must say that at that time I found it to be one of he master 
pieces of iCANN literature. Would our monitor censor Shakespeare? the 
English lyrics has full of "asses" ... Would Richard III Saint something 
(old reminiscences: you know better) battle's story pass muster?

I know you have removed yourself from the case as you are quoted in these 
mails. I think you should now involve yourself as I appeal onto you as 
Chair of this GA to cancel that decision.

I wish the best to Danny to restore his business and his very nice 
babybows.com site. I wish this GA to see peace and efficiency restored. And 
to us all to have Eric continuing to be our brilliant dotcommer.

Jefsey

On 09:20 18/06/01, Alexander Svensson said:

>The list monitors have decided to suspend Eric Dierker's
>posting rights for four weeks, beginning today (Monday,
>18 June) until Monday, 16 July.
>
>We have received several complaints about postings by
>Eric Dierker; our decision is based on the personal attacks
>and insults in
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html and
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02077.html as well
>as the breach of the posting limit on two successive days:
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02551.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02552.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02556.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02571.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02574.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02577.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02580.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02588.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02589.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02604.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02605.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02622.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02623.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02625.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02626.html
>
>The GA posting rules are laid down in
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules.html:
>
>- The messages must be relevant to the business of the GA
>- The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
>   - Not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander
>   - Not using offensive language
>- If the GA Chair or a list monitor asks for a limit to the number
>   of posts per person per day, this must be respected
>- The size of messages should be kept reasonable (there should be
>   a VERY good reason to send a message of more than 10 Kbytes).
>
>The time of the suspension has been doubled since Eric
>Dierker has already received a two week suspension in May.
>This decision may be appealed to the GA Chair.
>
>Best regards,
>/// Alexander (for the list monitors)
>--
>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, 19 Jun 2001 08:41:41 -0400
From: "Ken Stubbs" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

i fully support the suspension..
there are already too many distractions and unnecessary bickering on this
list and unnecessary rancor and sarcasm only diminishes the list
creditability and the related "noise"drives away potential new
member-subscribers

ken stubbs

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Jefsey Morfin" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

> Dear Interim Chair,
> We have a been certain number here rereading the incriminated Eric's
mails.
> I really fail to see what was hurting in the first mail ending with the
> author's best loves, and I accept - as the author says it - the second is
> lyric, but I must say that at that time I found it to be one of he master
> pieces of iCANN literature. Would our monitor censor Shakespeare? the
> English lyrics has full of "asses" ... Would Richard III Saint something
> (old reminiscences: you know better) battle's story pass muster?
>
> I know you have removed yourself from the case as you are quoted in these
> mails. I think you should now involve yourself as I appeal onto you as
> Chair of this GA to cancel that decision.
>
> I wish the best to Danny to restore his business and his very nice
> babybows.com site. I wish this GA to see peace and efficiency restored.
And
> to us all to have Eric continuing to be our brilliant dotcommer.
>
> Jefsey
>
>
>
> On 09:20 18/06/01, Alexander Svensson said:
>
> >The list monitors have decided to suspend Eric Dierker's
> >posting rights for four weeks, beginning today (Monday,
> >18 June) until Monday, 16 July.
> >
> >We have received several complaints about postings by
> >Eric Dierker; our decision is based on the personal attacks
> >and insults in
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html and
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02077.html as well
> >as the breach of the posting limit on two successive days:
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02551.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02552.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02556.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02571.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02574.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02577.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02580.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02588.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02589.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02604.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02605.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02622.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02623.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02625.html
> >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02626.html
> >
> >The GA posting rules are laid down in
> >http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules.html:
> >
> >- The messages must be relevant to the business of the GA
> >- The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
> >   - Not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander
> >   - Not using offensive language
> >- If the GA Chair or a list monitor asks for a limit to the number
> >   of posts per person per day, this must be respected
> >- The size of messages should be kept reasonable (there should be
> >   a VERY good reason to send a message of more than 10 Kbytes).
> >
> >The time of the suspension has been doubled since Eric
> >Dierker has already received a two week suspension in May.
> >This decision may be appealed to the GA Chair.
> >
> >Best regards,
> >/// Alexander (for the list monitors)
> >--
> >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: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 06:20:54 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

Hello Ken,

Tuesday, June 19, 2001, 5:41:41 AM, Ken Stubbs wrote:

> i fully support the suspension..
> there are already too many distractions and unnecessary bickering on this
> list and unnecessary rancor and sarcasm only diminishes the list
> creditability and the related "noise"drives away potential new
> member-subscribers

Then push for rules to address this, and see if you get enough support
for them.

Don't use abusive interpretations of the existing rules just to get
rid of things you don't like.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

- --
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, 19 Jun 2001 10:40:01 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

Ken, 

I rarely agree with WXW, but in this case I must.  It seems that 
when certain cliques do not like what an individual has to say, they 
attack by calling for suspension of the poster.  This is true on all 
sides of an issue. 

Personalities differ and so do posting styles.  The GA is the last 
place where posters should be penalized for passionate 
statements of position.  For many individuals, it seems to be the 
only place left to voice their frustration at being excluded from 
ICANN processes and are demanding a voice.

I, personally, do not care for some of Erics rants.  OTOH, I will 
strongly advocate his right to them.  To me, much of it is noice and 
could be so much less verbose.  OTOH, it is his style.  My 
suggestion to those who do not like these posts or who resent the 
style, use yoru filtering techniques to avoid them.  This is not a 
"private" list.  It is open to the public.  Let's deal with it.  His posts 
are not off topic as he is discussing domain names and the public.

Leah

On 19 Jun 2001, at 8:41, Ken Stubbs wrote:

> i fully support the suspension..
> there are already too many distractions and unnecessary bickering on
> this list and unnecessary rancor and sarcasm only diminishes the list
> creditability and the related "noise"drives away potential new
> member-subscribers
> 
> ken stubbs
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jefsey Morfin" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker
> 
> 
> > Dear Interim Chair,
> > We have a been certain number here rereading the incriminated Eric's
> mails.
> > I really fail to see what was hurting in the first mail ending with
> > the author's best loves, and I accept - as the author says it - the
> > second is lyric, but I must say that at that time I found it to be
> > one of he master pieces of iCANN literature. Would our monitor
> > censor Shakespeare? the English lyrics has full of "asses" ... Would
> > Richard III Saint something (old reminiscences: you know better)
> > battle's story pass muster?
> >
> > I know you have removed yourself from the case as you are quoted in
> > these mails. I think you should now involve yourself as I appeal
> > onto you as Chair of this GA to cancel that decision.
> >
> > I wish the best to Danny to restore his business and his very nice
> > babybows.com site. I wish this GA to see peace and efficiency
> > restored.
> And
> > to us all to have Eric continuing to be our brilliant dotcommer.
> >
> > Jefsey
> >
> >
> >
> > On 09:20 18/06/01, Alexander Svensson said:
> >
> > >The list monitors have decided to suspend Eric Dierker's
> > >posting rights for four weeks, beginning today (Monday,
> > >18 June) until Monday, 16 July.
> > >
> > >We have received several complaints about postings by
> > >Eric Dierker; our decision is based on the personal attacks
> > >and insults in
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html and
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02077.html as well
> > >as the breach of the posting limit on two successive days:
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02551.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02552.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02556.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02571.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02574.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02577.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02580.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02588.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02589.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02604.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02605.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02622.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02623.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02625.html
> > >http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02626.html
> > >
> > >The GA posting rules are laid down in
> > >http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules.html:
> > >
> > >- The messages must be relevant to the business of the GA
> > >- The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
> > >   - Not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander
> > >   - Not using offensive language
> > >- If the GA Chair or a list monitor asks for a limit to the number
> > >   of posts per person per day, this must be respected
> > >- The size of messages should be kept reasonable (there should be
> > >   a VERY good reason to send a message of more than 10 Kbytes).
> > >
> > >The time of the suspension has been doubled since Eric
> > >Dierker has already received a two week suspension in May.
> > >This decision may be appealed to the GA Chair.
> > >
> > >Best regards,
> > >/// Alexander (for the list monitors)
> > >--
> > >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-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 

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

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

Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:35:17 -0400
From: "J. William Semich" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

Call me Stupid, but I sure don't see anything except strong expression of
personal opinion in

http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02077.html 

And, as in all "free speech" environemnts, participants have the option to
ignore such strong sentiments if they choose. 

Say, whatever happened to "freedom of speech and expression" in the GA
anyway? 

Bill Semich
.NU Domain

At 09:20 AM 6/18/01 +0200, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
>The list monitors have decided to suspend Eric Dierker's
>posting rights for four weeks, beginning today (Monday,
>18 June) until Monday, 16 July.
>
>We have received several complaints about postings by
>Eric Dierker; our decision is based on the personal attacks
>and insults in
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html and
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02077.html as well
>as the breach of the posting limit on two successive days:
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02551.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02552.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02556.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02563.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02571.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02574.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02577.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02580.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02588.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02589.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02604.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02605.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02622.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02623.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02625.html
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg02626.html
>
>The GA posting rules are laid down in
>http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-ga-rules.html:
>
>- The messages must be relevant to the business of the GA
>- The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:
>  - Not indulging in personal attacks, insults or slander
>  - Not using offensive language
>- If the GA Chair or a list monitor asks for a limit to the number
>  of posts per person per day, this must be respected
>- The size of messages should be kept reasonable (there should be
>  a VERY good reason to send a message of more than 10 Kbytes).
>
>The time of the suspension has been doubled since Eric
>Dierker has already received a two week suspension in May.
>This decision may be appealed to the GA Chair.
>
>Best regards,
>/// Alexander (for the list monitors)
>--
>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, 19 Jun 2001 11:01:15 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

At 8:41 am -0400 6/19/01, Ken Stubbs wrote:
>i fully support the suspension..
>there are already too many distractions and unnecessary bickering on this
>list and unnecessary rancor and sarcasm only diminishes the list
>creditability and the related "noise"drives away potential new
>member-subscribers

Of course, the whole system would work a lot better if the DNSO board reps
voted the way the DNSO asked them to vote, rather than doing what their
non-DNSO paymaster told them to do.

Wouldn't it, Ken?

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.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: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:13:16 -0400
From: Sandy Harris <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

L Gallegos wrote:

> I rarely agree with WXW, but in this case I must.

I almost never agree with Leah, but do here.

> I, personally, do not care for some of Erics rants.  OTOH, I will
> strongly advocate his right to them.

Exactly.

> To me, much of it is noice and
> could be so much less verbose.  OTOH, it is his style.  My
> suggestion to those who do not like these posts or who resent the
> style, use yoru filtering techniques to avoid them.  This is not a
> "private" list.  It is open to the public.  Let's deal with it.  His posts
> are not off topic as he is discussing domain names and the public.
>
- --
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, 19 Jun 2001 12:34:23 -0400
From: "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

This particular suspension seems capricious. That is, when compared with
other postings by other people which did NOT result in suspensions.

Personally, I feel that Eric is a bit off-base in the personal remarks,
but that is beside the point. He has a right to post, and others have a
right to read it or not read it as they choose.

We are getting more concerned with the form and rules here, and less
concerned with the substance of the work we are supposed to be doing.

Peter de Blanc

- --
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, 19 Jun 2001 10:04:10 -0700
From: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] WIPO receives numerous responses on future domain name rules

It is for reasons like this that I am coming to believe that the GA has
no more pressing need than to destroy utterly the fallacious concept
that the U.S. Government, Network Solutions, Verisign, ICANN,
WIPO, or anyone else, has the slightest legal basis for messing with
duely granted registrations of domain names to anyone. The UDRP
is based on pure power, not law, and it should be hoped that the
entirety of domain name holders has more power than that whole
bunch put together.  (There are times that one can be proud of
being an attorney, but other times that one feels shame in being
associated with a bunch that would do this kind of thing to the
rights of ordinary citizens, and only for the almighty dollar.)

(Also cross-posted to ga-udrp)

Bill Lovell

Jeff Williams wrote:

> All assembly members,
>
>   The following is from the NCDNHC list.  I think you will find the URL
> interesting and worth your while to review closely:
>
> =======================================================
>
> The World Intellectual Property Organization has collected numerous
> comments
> from a variety of groups regarding the possible further extension of
> trademark protections for domain names--a move that some groups contend
> will
> hurt free speech.
>
> See
> http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/#highlights
>
> Sincerely,
> Christopher Chiu
> Global Internet Liberty Campaign Organizer
> American Civil Liberties Union
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as:
> [email-masked]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> [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

- --
Any terms or acronyms above that are not familiar
to the reader may possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
GLOSSARY: http://www.icann.org/general/glossary.htm

- --
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, 19 Jun 2001 10:09:18 -0700
From: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

Andy Gardner wrote:

> At 8:41 am -0400 6/19/01, Ken Stubbs wrote:
> >i fully support the suspension..
> >there are already too many distractions and unnecessary bickering on this
> >list and unnecessary rancor and sarcasm only diminishes the list
> >creditability and the related "noise"drives away potential new
> >member-subscribers
>
> Of course, the whole system would work a lot better if the DNSO board reps
> voted the way the DNSO asked them to vote, rather than doing what their
> non-DNSO paymaster told them to do.
>
> Wouldn't it, Ken?

Unfortunately, the Bylaws do not require them to do that.  ICANN does not
have a "representative" structure, wherein the representative is to reflect
the
wishes of the people who put him/her there.  Once in office, a representative
is to vote "in the best interest of the Corporation," and the wishes of that
person's "constituency" no longer matter. One can only hope that a particular
representative will feel that to reflect the wishes of that constituency
indeed IS
"in the best interest of the Corporation."

Bill Lovell

>
>
> --
> Andrew P. Gardner
> barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
> We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
> Get active: http://www.tldlobby.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

- --
Any terms or acronyms above that are not familiar
to the reader may possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
GLOSSARY: http://www.icann.org/general/glossary.htm

- --
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, 19 Jun 2001 17:16:34 -0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] [ADMIN] Four Week Suspension of Eric Dierker

If I may paraphrase some of the earlier postings, "I often agree with Peter, 
and this time makes no exception".

Peter de Blanc wrote:

>
>We are getting more concerned with the form and rules here, and less
>concerned with the substance of the work we are supposed to be doing.
>

Exactly.

For instance, we asked people to limit to 5 post per day their contribution 
to the GA (or other lists). This is to favour different POV, and favour 
discussion.
If the effect of an administrative action from the monitors is causing a 
multiplication of posts, and the corresponding loss of focus on other 
issues, something is wrong.

But rather than starting yet another discussion on what is wrong, may I 
suggest a way out?
The rules allow for the Chair to suspend a suspension (pun not intended): 
this is not meant as "overturning a decision", but rather as "clemency" 
action.

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 17:21:35 -0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga] Delay

Just not to add delay to delay, can't we throw in names of potential 
candidates on the list?
We may have consensus on a name, and proceed "by acclamation" without the 
need for a formal vote.
All considered, we are seeking somebody not for a "power" position, but to 
do some work. This may substantially reduce the number of volounteers.

Regards
Roberto

>From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
>To: DPF <[email-masked]>
>CC: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Delay
>Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:41:49 -0700
>
>Hello DPF,
>
>Monday, June 18, 2001, 6:31:40 PM, DPF wrote:
> > I suggest to get around this we have a slightly less informal election
> > than for ga-chair.  This is an appt that Danny could make himself but
> > instead he has chosen to let the GA vote on.
>
> > Firstly the electoral college should just be the current [email-masked]
> > (and ga-full automatically) subscribers.  That one ballot paper can be
> > sent to the mailing list and that is it.
>
>The issue is with authenticity, as Elizabeth quite correctly points
>out.
>
>Kent had written an email ballot system I believe that can handle
>this, and deals well with the same "authenticity" issue.
>
>And if I remember correctly (it's been quite a while) it handles the
>tabulating automatically.  I don't recall if it can do the kind of
>auditing by unique ballot numbers that the system the secretariat
>developed does.  If not, I'm sure this is an easy add-on.  The
>auditing report is a necessary requirement to avoid charges of the
>host of the system from tampering.
>
>I don't know how long it would take to get setup with Kent's system or
>to modify it to do the auditing reports, but we should look into this
>quite soon.  Then we just need a location to host it (which is not
>that big of an issue because of the auditing, any number of us with
>the resources can do it gratis).
>
> > A voting address should be provided which goes to a couple of
> > scrutineers.  I would suggest Michael Froomkin and Kent Crispin if
> > they are willing.  if those two agree on the vote count we can be sure
> > it is correct :-)
>
> > The ballot paper will have a list of nominees and people vote for the
> > person they want.  The e-mail must be sent from the an address which
> > is subscribed to [email-masked].  The person voting will also receive
> > back a confirmation of how they voted so this stops anyone voting on
> > behalf of someone else without their knowledge.
>
> > We open nominations for a week and have voting for a week so we should
> > get a result in just over two weeks.
>
>In the interim, until we can get an "independent" system that won't
>require going to the secretariat or the council everytime we need to
>run a simple vote, we should just do what David is suggesting.
>
>--
>Best regards,
>William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
>Userfriendly.com Domains
>The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
>DNS Services from $1.65/mo
>
>--
>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
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #551
************************