Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #846
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST         Wednesday, November 14 2001         Volume 01 : Number 846

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

Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:03:39 +1300
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] icannworld.org

On 09:07 13/11/01 -0800, William X Walsh said:
>Tuesday, Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 8:53:16 AM, Sandy Harris wrote:
>
> > I find myself wondering about the line on www.icannworld.org's front page:
>
> > " This site is sponsored by the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain Name
> > " Supporting Organization
>
> > Is that true? Can someone point me to the record of the GA deciding to
> > sponsor that?
>
>You know, I find this rather amusing.  A person gets a few supporters
>from a group, and all of a sudden, that group is supporting what they
>are saying and doing.  At least that is how these people want to
>present it.

Some people find this amusing. Others find it tragic.
A person goes out of his way to help with outreach, overreaches  with 
regards to claimed support, and gets slammed to the point of being stamped 
in the ground.
Can you please keep in mind that the job of GA Chair is an unpaid job and 
that time and money needed for the job is volunteered.

Discourage any such volunteering and the only people to "run" the GA are 
the people who get paid, such as the ICANN staff and the secretariat.
Is that what you want?

While I am very disappointed about what happended yesterday at the GA 
meeting, with the published agenda suddenly disregarded  and 2 items not 
addressed,  I will not help playing the game of attacking a Chair before 
there is another elected one willing to take over that thankless job.

I have seen enough of this "amusing" game played in the IDNO for  years now.
The result is not enough nominees to run a proper election.

>But unfortunately the Names Council as all too cowardly to step up to
>their duty under the bylaws and appoint an effective GA chair.

The idea of an top-down appointed chair would only be acceptable if the 
Names Council itself contained a constituency of Individual Domain Name 
Holders who would have input in such an appointment.
Others may find that top-down *in itself*  is undemocratic especially if 
the role of Chair is not tightly circumscribed.

- --Joop

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

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

Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:49:19 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[3]: [ga] icannworld.org

Tuesday, Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 1:03:39 PM, Joop Teernstra wrote:

> On 09:07 13/11/01 -0800, William X Walsh said:
>>Tuesday, Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 8:53:16 AM, Sandy Harris wrote:
>>
>> > I find myself wondering about the line on www.icannworld.org's front page:
>>
>> > " This site is sponsored by the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain Name
>> > " Supporting Organization
>>
>> > Is that true? Can someone point me to the record of the GA deciding to
>> > sponsor that?
>>
>>You know, I find this rather amusing.  A person gets a few supporters
>>from a group, and all of a sudden, that group is supporting what they
>>are saying and doing.  At least that is how these people want to
>>present it.

> Some people find this amusing. Others find it tragic.
> A person goes out of his way to help with outreach, overreaches  with 
> regards to claimed support, and gets slammed to the point of being stamped 
> in the ground.
> Can you please keep in mind that the job of GA Chair is an unpaid job and 
> that time and money needed for the job is volunteered.

Sure, if he made even HALF an effort at BEING A CHAIR, RATHER THAN
USING IT TO RUBBER STAMP HIS PERSONAL AGENDA.

We do not have a chair.

> Discourage any such volunteering and the only people to "run" the GA are 
> the people who get paid, such as the ICANN staff and the secretariat.
> Is that what you want?

If the alternative is what the GA has had since Danny took the seat, I
can't imagine them doing any worse a job than he has.  It could only
get better.

>>But unfortunately the Names Council as all too cowardly to step up to
>>their duty under the bylaws and appoint an effective GA chair.

> The idea of an top-down appointed chair would only be acceptable if the 
> Names Council itself contained a constituency of Individual Domain Name 
> Holders who would have input in such an appointment.
> Others may find that top-down *in itself*  is undemocratic especially if 
> the role of Chair is not tightly circumscribed.

Acceptable to you, perhaps.  But what you think is acceptable is
really irrelevant.  Under the bylaws, the Names Council has the SOLE
responsibility in this regard.  They have extended a courtesy to us,
one that we did an excellent job with in selecting our first chair,
but did an incredibly dismal job in selecting his replacement.

And the GA has shown that it does not have the motivation to seek a
positive change and seek to replace him on its own initiative.

That makes it the Names Council's responsibility to recognize the
ineffectual chairmanship in the GA, and do something about it.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Webcertificates.info
SSL Certificates for resellers from $49ea

- --
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, 13 Nov 2001 18:27:21 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannworld.org motion

Richard and all assembly members,

  I am afraid I must second this motion as well...

  Now that the this motion has bee seconded.  It is time for the
debate to take place in accordance with the rules for this assembly.
Once that period is complete a ballot must be provided to vote
upon this motion...

Kroon, Richard wrote:

> I'll second the motion.
>
> --Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 1:34 PM
> To: [email-masked]; Joanna Lane; Joop Teernstra; Jeff Williams
> Subject: [ga] icannworld.org motion
>
> Whereas the General Assembly of the DNSO has NOT agreed to
> sponsor the web site ICANNWORLD.ORG;
>
> I move that the owner(s) of the ICANNWORLD.ORG be requested
> by the membership of the General Assembly to remove any
> statement of sponsorship by this Assembly that may appear on
> the web site in question.
>
> Most Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
> P.S.  please forward to the GA list if this message does not
> make it via normal delivery as my mails are often not
> getting through for some reason.
> --
> 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

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

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

Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:31:53 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannworld.org

My messages are being blocked or something.

This is the fourth copy I'm sending to this ML.

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> On 09:07 13/11/01 -0800, William X Walsh said:
> >Tuesday, Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 8:53:16 AM, Sandy Harris wrote:
> >
> > > I find myself wondering about the line on www.icannworld.org's front page:
> >
> > > " This site is sponsored by the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain Name
> > > " Supporting Organization
> >
> > > Is that true? Can someone point me to the record of the GA deciding to
> > > sponsor that?
> >
> >You know, I find this rather amusing.  A person gets a few supporters
> >from a group, and all of a sudden, that group is supporting what they
> >are saying and doing.  At least that is how these people want to
> >present it.
>
> Some people find this amusing. Others find it tragic.
> A person goes out of his way to help with outreach, overreaches  with
> regards to claimed support, and gets slammed to the point of being stamped
> in the ground.
> Can you please keep in mind that the job of GA Chair is an unpaid job and
> that time and money needed for the job is volunteered.

Joop, that is bull!  I could have cobbled together that
lame, frame-based, sorry excuse for a "website" in under 15
minutes in Dreamweaver!  If anyone thinks differently, I can
prove it for them anytime.  Don't even try to call it an
outreach effort!  That is a sick, pathetic, fcuking joke, so
don't go falling for it.

[If I made any spelling errors... they were intentional!]

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

>
>
> Discourage any such volunteering and the only people to "run" the GA are
> the people who get paid, such as the ICANN staff and the secretariat.
> Is that what you want?
>
> While I am very disappointed about what happended yesterday at the GA
> meeting, with the published agenda suddenly disregarded  and 2 items not
> addressed,  I will not help playing the game of attacking a Chair before
> there is another elected one willing to take over that thankless job.
>
> I have seen enough of this "amusing" game played in the IDNO for  years now.
> The result is not enough nominees to run a proper election.
>
> >But unfortunately the Names Council as all too cowardly to step up to
> >their duty under the bylaws and appoint an effective GA chair.
>
> The idea of an top-down appointed chair would only be acceptable if the
> Names Council itself contained a constituency of Individual Domain Name
> Holders who would have input in such an appointment.
> Others may find that top-down *in itself*  is undemocratic especially if
> the role of Chair is not tightly circumscribed.
>
> --Joop
>
> --
> 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
- --
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, 13 Nov 2001 19:38:55 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannworld.org

Jeff,

My messages are being blocked or something.

This is the fifth copy I'm sending to the GA ML.

Please forward the below, if necessary.

SS

- ------

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> On 09:07 13/11/01 -0800, William X Walsh said:
> >Tuesday, Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 8:53:16 AM, Sandy Harris wrote:
> >
> > > I find myself wondering about the line on www.icannworld.org's front page:
> >
> > > " This site is sponsored by the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain Name
> > > " Supporting Organization
> >
> > > Is that true? Can someone point me to the record of the GA deciding to
> > > sponsor that?
> >
> >You know, I find this rather amusing.  A person gets a few supporters
> >from a group, and all of a sudden, that group is supporting what they
> >are saying and doing.  At least that is how these people want to
> >present it.
>
> Some people find this amusing. Others find it tragic.
> A person goes out of his way to help with outreach, overreaches  with
> regards to claimed support, and gets slammed to the point of being stamped
> in the ground.
> Can you please keep in mind that the job of GA Chair is an unpaid job and
> that time and money needed for the job is volunteered.

Joop, that is bull!  I could have cobbled together that
lame, frame-based, sorry excuse for a "website" in under 15
minutes in Dreamweaver!  If anyone thinks differently, I can
prove it for them anytime.  Don't even try to call it an
outreach effort!  That is a sick, pathetic, fcuking joke, so
don't go falling for it.

[If I made any spelling errors... they were intentional!]

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

>
>
> Discourage any such volunteering and the only people to "run" the GA are
> the people who get paid, such as the ICANN staff and the secretariat.
> Is that what you want?
>
> While I am very disappointed about what happended yesterday at the GA
> meeting, with the published agenda suddenly disregarded  and 2 items not
> addressed,  I will not help playing the game of attacking a Chair before
> there is another elected one willing to take over that thankless job.
>
> I have seen enough of this "amusing" game played in the IDNO for  years now.
> The result is not enough nominees to run a proper election.
>
> >But unfortunately the Names Council as all too cowardly to step up to
> >their duty under the bylaws and appoint an effective GA chair.
>
> The idea of an top-down appointed chair would only be acceptable if the
> Names Council itself contained a constituency of Individual Domain Name
> Holders who would have input in such an appointment.
> Others may find that top-down *in itself*  is undemocratic especially if
> the role of Chair is not tightly circumscribed.
>
> --Joop
>
> --
> 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
- --
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, 13 Nov 2001 20:00:36 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannworld.org

Sotiris and all asseembly members,

  Will do.          Done.

Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> My messages are being blocked or something.
>
> This is the fifth copy I'm sending to the GA ML.
>
> Please forward the below, if necessary.
>
> SS
>
> ------
>
> Joop Teernstra wrote:
>
> > On 09:07 13/11/01 -0800, William X Walsh said:
> > >Tuesday, Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 8:53:16 AM, Sandy Harris wrote:
> > >
> > > > I find myself wondering about the line on www.icannworld.org's front page:
> > >
> > > > " This site is sponsored by the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain Name
> > > > " Supporting Organization
> > >
> > > > Is that true? Can someone point me to the record of the GA deciding to
> > > > sponsor that?
> > >
> > >You know, I find this rather amusing.  A person gets a few supporters
> > >from a group, and all of a sudden, that group is supporting what they
> > >are saying and doing.  At least that is how these people want to
> > >present it.
> >
> > Some people find this amusing. Others find it tragic.
> > A person goes out of his way to help with outreach, overreaches  with
> > regards to claimed support, and gets slammed to the point of being stamped
> > in the ground.
> > Can you please keep in mind that the job of GA Chair is an unpaid job and
> > that time and money needed for the job is volunteered.
>
> Joop, that is bull!  I could have cobbled together that
> lame, frame-based, sorry excuse for a "website" in under 15
> minutes in Dreamweaver!  If anyone thinks differently, I can
> prove it for them anytime.  Don't even try to call it an
> outreach effort!  That is a sick, pathetic, fcuking joke, so
> don't go falling for it.
>
> [If I made any spelling errors... they were intentional!]
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
> >
> >
> > Discourage any such volunteering and the only people to "run" the GA are
> > the people who get paid, such as the ICANN staff and the secretariat.
> > Is that what you want?
> >
> > While I am very disappointed about what happended yesterday at the GA
> > meeting, with the published agenda suddenly disregarded  and 2 items not
> > addressed,  I will not help playing the game of attacking a Chair before
> > there is another elected one willing to take over that thankless job.
> >
> > I have seen enough of this "amusing" game played in the IDNO for  years now.
> > The result is not enough nominees to run a proper election.
> >
> > >But unfortunately the Names Council as all too cowardly to step up to
> > >their duty under the bylaws and appoint an effective GA chair.
> >
> > The idea of an top-down appointed chair would only be acceptable if the
> > Names Council itself contained a constituency of Individual Domain Name
> > Holders who would have input in such an appointment.
> > Others may find that top-down *in itself*  is undemocratic especially if
> > the role of Chair is not tightly circumscribed.
> >
> > --Joop
> >
> > --
> > 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

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

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

Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:11:52 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Outreach-Procedural Bullshit

After reviewing the several reviews that have occurred on this subject
throughout ICANN's history, you can see a pattern that the NC and the
BoD are simply following the participants desire which is not to conduct
outreach.

I have watched many good outreach web sites go up stemming from the DNSO
work.  Good bad or indifferent they all help outreach in some degree.
The list for continuing work of the WG-Review and Joannas' site come to 
mind as does some kind of site Sotiris ran where you could conference,
Many good votes have taken place on Joops' voting site. I note that both
the Watch and the Blog are void of large letter disclaimers of their
official status of ICANN affiliation-both run by esteemed Attorneys.
They are also all attacked by those blocking outreach which includes
bringing anyone in that is not a professional of some sort.

I think the point of the motion regarding icannworld may be very valid,
but only because it is my considered opinion that the Bulk of active
participants do not want any type of outreach that may diminish their
own standing to be heard and their opinion revered.

Certainly the prevention of educational sites for outreach is consistent
with reducing the At Large Seats and requiring domain name ownership for
membership.

The BoD yesterday made great progress yesterday because it recognized
this type of squabbling over form and not substance as exactly what it
is; procedural Bullshit.

I am sure that the pending motion will not be needed.  Certainly Danny
will change the site or pull it down altogether and there will be
another victory for procedural Bullshit.

Jeff, Sotiris, and William are all exactly right on the impropriety of
form here and they could not be more wrong in invoking procedural
bullshit to block positive attempts at outreach.  My congratulations to
three smart guys.

Eric

ps.
(why didn't someone just ask him to change it?, all of this commotion
has occurred and he has not even seen a word of it as he is attending
the security meetings)
- --
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, 13 Nov 2001 19:30:54 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] DNH Plus - Plus

On the side of getting actual individuals to have voting rights in the
AL significant discussion was had yesterday.

Taking up, quit obviously on discussions contributed by GA members on
the ALS Forum, Mr. Bilt referenced many times that essentially domain
name holders would be the core of membership but that other methods
should be implemented to assure secure inclusion.  Ms. Dyson was quick
to point out that certainly attendance at a meeting  such as yesterday
was certainly valid proof of identification.

This is ok people, while we have a long way to go this is progress.  We
can extrapolate and see that postal verification and technical methods
of internet verification are logical extensions.

Please watch as democracy will take shape and form in Bosnia and now
Afghanistan.  They will take awhile before everyone can just run in and
vote.  Here in the US we basically de facto require literacy at a
reasonable level. (or in Florida maybe not;-)

I know that to many promises have been broken and bitterness is the only
reason they remain participating here in ICANN.  But contrary to the
alarmists great progress is being made and by the time my techie friends
figure out a way for every internet user to be able to vote securely I
believe we will have that right.  At this point it is technology and
money that holds us back.

I will address money later.

Sincerely,
Eric Dierker

(as always I ask any dotcommoner to step forward if this is not the
position of the dotcommoner)

- --
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, 14 Nov 2001 15:24:12 +1100
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] icannworld.org

Hi Joop

> While I am very disappointed about what happended yesterday at the GA
> meeting, with the published agenda suddenly disregarded  and 2 items not
> addressed,  I will not help playing the game of attacking a Chair before
> there is another elected one willing to take over that thankless job.

Sorry, Joop, the TLDA members have raised as an issue that Bradley
Thornton's presentation was cut out from the agenda without notice.  If
true, I would argue
that is iniquitous.  I have no knowledge of the reason for it being cut.

You should be aware that Danny lost my support some time ago.

As far as Danny following proper process I would also remind you of the
following:

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Corliss <[email-masked]>
To: Danny Younger <[email-masked]>
Cc: [ga] <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Motion Accepted

Hi Danny

Perhaps I should have read your wishy washy, doublespeak wording more
carefully.  You wrote:

> > At some point our Secretariat will advise when it is ready to once more
> > support the activities of the General Assembly.  Perhaps we might be
> > able to conclude a vote on this motion by early October (according to
> > the most recent timetable put forth).  In the meantime, you may wish to
> > get a "sense of the GA" on this topic through a poll.

The fact is that the DNSO Secretariat never had any intention of putting my
motion to a vote.  I doubt if you did either despite your misleading heading
"Motion Accepted".

If we can't even get an internal motion to a vote of the GA, what chance do
we have with something that has external implicatations.

So can we cut the crap and just write off the GA as a farce?

Best regards
Patrick

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Corliss <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: [ga] <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Motion Accepted

> On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:33:50 EDT, Danny Younger wrote:
>
> > I have no objection to accepting the motion that you have proposed.
> > At some point our Secretariat will advise when it is ready to once more
> > support the activities of the General Assembly.  Perhaps we might be
> > able to conclude a vote on this motion by early October (according to
> > the most recent timetable put forth).  In the meantime, you may wish to
> > get a "sense of the GA" on this topic through a poll.
>
> Thank you for your support and your comments.  By my count, there are
> 18 declared supporters for the present proposal:
>
> *    Peter de Blanc
> *    Roeland Meyer
> *    Leah Gallegos
> *    Jefsey Morfin
> *    Ken Stubbs
> *    William S. Lovell
> *    Marilyn Cade
> *    Ross Wm. Rader (for Tucows)
> *    Bradley Thornton
> *    Alexander Svensson
> *    Michael McNulty
> *    Joop Teernstra
> *    Erica Roberts
> *    Marc Schneiders
> *    Vany Martinez
> *    John C. Lewis
> *    Derek Conant (with reservations)
> *    Patrick Corliss (myself)
>
> I believe that we have sufficient mandate to request members to use the
> [ga-rules] mailing list to debate procedural or other administrative
> issues like websites, mailing lists, etc.
>
> > To facilitate that effort, and in response to the recommendation put
forth
> > by Bill Lovell to create our own website, I have begun building such a
> > site (with an area devoted to current motions).  You may visit
> > http://www.icannworld.org to see the results of my efforts over the
> > course of this weekend.
>
> I would, of course, thank both Bill Lovell and yourself, as well as Joanna
> Lane, for your kind efforts.
>
> One wonders why we cannot incorporate these initiatives into the current
> DNSO website.  I see this as an issue that needs to be discussed on the
> [ga-rules] mailing list.
>
> > Clicking on the General Assembly Link will take you to the page that
> > leads you to the Straw Poll.
>
> Thank you.  At least we start with the 18 names above (19 if we include
> yourself) in favour of discussing non-substantive issues on the [ga-rules]
> mailing list.
>
> I see that as sufficient mandate to encourage compliance with this motion.
>
> > Best regards,
> > Danny
>
> Best wishes
> Patrick Corliss

<snip footers>

- --
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, 13 Nov 2001 20:54:13 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] icannworld.org

I was quite pleased to meet and speak with Mr. Thorton after his presentation
and Q&A period.  The guy uses a little too much dramatic pause but otherwise the
presentation according to agenda that I witnessed was very good.

Boyo boyo this stuff sounds like a jealous spouse.

Let us center on substantive issues rather than personal grievances with gross
history and procedural tit for tat.

Sincerely,
Eric

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> Hi Joop
>
> > While I am very disappointed about what happended yesterday at the GA
> > meeting, with the published agenda suddenly disregarded  and 2 items not
> > addressed,  I will not help playing the game of attacking a Chair before
> > there is another elected one willing to take over that thankless job.
>
> Sorry, Joop, the TLDA members have raised as an issue that Bradley
> Thornton's presentation was cut out from the agenda without notice.  If
> true, I would argue
> that is iniquitous.  I have no knowledge of the reason for it being cut.
>
> You should be aware that Danny lost my support some time ago.
>
> As far as Danny following proper process I would also remind you of the
> following:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Patrick Corliss <[email-masked]>
> To: Danny Younger <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [ga] <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 6:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [ga] Motion Accepted
>
> Hi Danny
>
> Perhaps I should have read your wishy washy, doublespeak wording more
> carefully.  You wrote:
>
> > > At some point our Secretariat will advise when it is ready to once more
> > > support the activities of the General Assembly.  Perhaps we might be
> > > able to conclude a vote on this motion by early October (according to
> > > the most recent timetable put forth).  In the meantime, you may wish to
> > > get a "sense of the GA" on this topic through a poll.
>
> The fact is that the DNSO Secretariat never had any intention of putting my
> motion to a vote.  I doubt if you did either despite your misleading heading
> "Motion Accepted".
>
> If we can't even get an internal motion to a vote of the GA, what chance do
> we have with something that has external implicatations.
>
> So can we cut the crap and just write off the GA as a farce?
>
> Best regards
> Patrick
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Patrick Corliss <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [ga] <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 3:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [ga] Motion Accepted
>
> > On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:33:50 EDT, Danny Younger wrote:
> >
> > > I have no objection to accepting the motion that you have proposed.
> > > At some point our Secretariat will advise when it is ready to once more
> > > support the activities of the General Assembly.  Perhaps we might be
> > > able to conclude a vote on this motion by early October (according to
> > > the most recent timetable put forth).  In the meantime, you may wish to
> > > get a "sense of the GA" on this topic through a poll.
> >
> > Thank you for your support and your comments.  By my count, there are
> > 18 declared supporters for the present proposal:
> >
> > *    Peter de Blanc
> > *    Roeland Meyer
> > *    Leah Gallegos
> > *    Jefsey Morfin
> > *    Ken Stubbs
> > *    William S. Lovell
> > *    Marilyn Cade
> > *    Ross Wm. Rader (for Tucows)
> > *    Bradley Thornton
> > *    Alexander Svensson
> > *    Michael McNulty
> > *    Joop Teernstra
> > *    Erica Roberts
> > *    Marc Schneiders
> > *    Vany Martinez
> > *    John C. Lewis
> > *    Derek Conant (with reservations)
> > *    Patrick Corliss (myself)
> >
> > I believe that we have sufficient mandate to request members to use the
> > [ga-rules] mailing list to debate procedural or other administrative
> > issues like websites, mailing lists, etc.
> >
> > > To facilitate that effort, and in response to the recommendation put
> forth
> > > by Bill Lovell to create our own website, I have begun building such a
> > > site (with an area devoted to current motions).  You may visit
> > > http://www.icannworld.org to see the results of my efforts over the
> > > course of this weekend.
> >
> > I would, of course, thank both Bill Lovell and yourself, as well as Joanna
> > Lane, for your kind efforts.
> >
> > One wonders why we cannot incorporate these initiatives into the current
> > DNSO website.  I see this as an issue that needs to be discussed on the
> > [ga-rules] mailing list.
> >
> > > Clicking on the General Assembly Link will take you to the page that
> > > leads you to the Straw Poll.
> >
> > Thank you.  At least we start with the 18 names above (19 if we include
> > yourself) in favour of discussing non-substantive issues on the [ga-rules]
> > mailing list.
> >
> > I see that as sufficient mandate to encourage compliance with this motion.
> >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Danny
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Patrick Corliss
>
> <snip footers>
>
> --
> 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

- --
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, 13 Nov 2001 23:18:21 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:Attn. Erick Dierker "Spinmister?" [ga] Outreach-Procedural Bullshit

Eric and all assembly members,

Eric Dierker wrote:

> After reviewing the several reviews that have occurred on this subject
> throughout ICANN's history, you can see a pattern that the NC and the
> BoD are simply following the participants desire which is not to conduct
> outreach.

  Not at all really.  In fact just the opposite.  Although it is true and
has been
for some time that the ICANN BoD and staff as well as the NC have blocked
participation by any and all interested parties and/or stakeholders/users.
It
is not true, as you attempt to spin it here Eric, that this is what the
participants
desire or otherwise want.  Quite the contrary, as you well know and we
have discussed over the phone and in several E-mail exchanges, as well
as a number of willing potential participants on the DNSO GA list, which
were blocked, and are still blocked from participating because of inane
DNSO GA list rules or SELECTIVE CENSORSHIP.

>
>
> I have watched many good outreach web sites go up stemming from the DNSO
> work.

  And many are still active.

>  Good bad or indifferent they all help outreach in some degree.

  No they do not necessarily.  Some are organizations that seek to limit
participation by only certain groups that share a very specific political
bent that may or may not be friendly to what ICANN is supposed
to be or become.

>
> The list for continuing work of the WG-Review and Joannas' site come to
> mind as does some kind of site Sotiris ran where you could conference,
> Many good votes have taken place on Joops' voting site. I note that both
> the Watch and the Blog are void of large letter disclaimers of their
> official status of ICANN affiliation-both run by esteemed Attorneys.
> They are also all attacked by those blocking outreach which includes
> bringing anyone in that is not a professional of some sort.

  Yes, many of these groups or organization do limit their membership
to a particular political bent. As does the ICANN BOD and staff, the
ICANN Constituencies, the DNSO GA, the PSO, the ASO, APNIC,
IETF, ISOC, and oh yes lets not forget the IESG as well...

>
>
> I think the point of the motion regarding icannworld may be very valid,
> but only because it is my considered opinion that the Bulk of active
> participants do not want any type of outreach that may diminish their
> own standing to be heard and their opinion revered.

  What is ICANNWORDL.ORG?  Form the website it has not members,
it has no method showing or even describing how one can join, yet it
perports to have the support, falsely of the DNSO GA.  That is just
plain dishonest, Eric.  And that is getting such an organization off to
a bad start in these very paralysis times with other organizations
of various types harboring terrorists and other less than honest
"Operators".

>
>
> Certainly the prevention of educational sites for outreach is consistent
> with reducing the At Large Seats and requiring domain name ownership for
> membership.

  Not at all.  There is not prevention of educational sites under .EDU or
.ORG presently.  This is not to mention .US as well.  So your statement
here is not only unfounded, it is seemingly a blatant spin or twist of the
known facts.  And you know them, as you have commented to them
on this forum yourself on a number of occasions..

>
>
> The BoD yesterday made great progress yesterday because it recognized
> this type of squabbling over form and not substance as exactly what it
> is; procedural Bullshit.

  You cannot have good substance without good process.  As I followed
the meeting, there seemed to be very little of consequence and benefit
accomplished, as was also true today.

>
>
> I am sure that the pending motion will not be needed.  Certainly Danny
> will change the site or pull it down altogether and there will be
> another victory for procedural Bullshit.

  He should not pull it down IMHO.  But he should remove the statement
that the DNSO GA is supporting it.  Than put forth a motion requesting
the DNSO GA members support and make his case why we should
support it.

>
>
> Jeff, Sotiris, and William are all exactly right on the impropriety of
> form here and they could not be more wrong in invoking procedural
> bullshit to block positive attempts at outreach.  My congratulations to
> three smart guys.

  Thank you for the wonderful compliment.  But it is not just WXW, Sotiris,
and I that are objecting/questioning thus far as you also well know.
See in the archives:http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02634.html
from Sandy Harris and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02638.html
from Joanna Lane, and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02643.html
from Richard Kroon, and
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02645.html
from Daryl Lynch and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02648.html
from John Palmer, and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02649.html
from Steven Heath, and http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02650.html

from Michael Froomkin, and
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg02659.html
from Patrick Corliss.

>
>
> Eric
>
> ps.
> (why didn't someone just ask him to change it?, all of this commotion
> has occurred and he has not even seen a word of it as he is attending
> the security meetings)

  No one should've had to.  He knew and knows that what is was
doing before he did it is and remains very wrong and does not engender
trust.  Without a certain amount of trust, you loose any real support
in the present and more loss of support in the future.

>
> --
> 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 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #846
************************