Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #901
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Tuesday, December 4 2001          Volume 01 : Number 901

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

Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:50:43 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Final Review Task Force Report

Danny and all assembly and NC members,

  I don't think the DNSO GA should withdraw, but rather push harder
to be heard, or paid the respect that we as members deserve.

[email-masked] wrote:

> The final report of the Review Task Force has been posted with new amendments
> by Phil Sheppard which grant even more powers to Council Task Forces at the
> expense of Working Groups:
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc06/msg00464.html
>
> This is an ongoing attack against this Assembly's full participation in the
> DNSO process.  As usual, the positions of both the GA and the NCDNHC were
> cited and then disregarded.
>
> At this time, I would advocate having the GA withdraw from all Council
> activities until the working group process is respected.  I request the views
> of the membership.
>
> --
> 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: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:46:13 -0500
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] The Network Solutions contribution to international terror

I think it has be kept in mind that it is the REGISTRARS who are doing 
business with registrants, not the registries.  The customers of the 
registries are the registrars.  Therefore, it is the registrars who have the 
responsibility to abide by the embaro laws of the US if they are US 
based.  It is the responsibility of the US based Registries to do 
business with registrars based in US embargoed countries.

Therefore, the NSI registrar, for example would be responsible for the 
sale of domains to an embargoed country.  But the VGRS would be 
responsible for not doing buisnesss or contracting with a registrar from 
an embargoed country.

Any attorneys want to comment on this? Please?

[I am not an attorney, and this is my opinion only]

Leah

On 3 Dec 2001, at 16:38, Jeff Williams wrote:

> Joseph and all assembly members,
> 
> Joseph wrote:
> 
> > Roeland,
> >         Sorry, I accidentally did not send my previous post to the GA. 
> >         I'm doing
> > so now.
> >
> > Roeland Meyer:
> > >>> If MY registered for embargo'd registrants then NSI might have to
> > >>> block
> > MY from the root-zone. NSI is a US registry under contract to US DOC.
> > AFAICT, there are contingent liability problems otherwise, for NSI. This
> > is what I was saying four years ago, policies at the root registry push
> > down to the sub-registries and registrars. Especially, those that are
> > based in real laws. It all depends on the jurisdiction of the registry
> > and its upstream. *** As I am not a lawyer, I can only state my opinion. 
> > And my opinion is that the above is false/cannot be done.  If NSI have to
> > block MY from the root-zone, US must have a clear sanction against MY.
> 
>   But the US does not have to block all of the .MY name space, only those
> 2nd level domain names that may be harboring terrorists or in some way
> supporting them.  This is what Roeland was getting at.  Hence you
> contention here Joseph is overkill and does not address the concern in a
> manner that is necessary.
> 
> >  This is like saying
> > that US will stop economic ties to countries that sells food to
> > Afghanistan.
> 
>   Well the US  won't, but we could.  However this analogy is also not
> appropriate to what Roeland was saying either. (See above my comments)
> 
> >
> > It is a whole chain reaction ending up that US having to sanction all
> > countries in the world.  A sanction is a direct ban.  Not indirectly.
> 
>   There are many levels of sanctions that the US could impose and does
> presently.
> 
> >
> >
> > regards,
> > - Joseph LEE (Fook Heng)
> > =========================
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:14 PM
> > To: 'Joseph'
> > Subject: RE: [ga] The Network Solutions contribution to international
> > terr or
> >
> > If MY registered for embargo'd registrants then NSI might have to block
> > MY from the root-zone. NSI is a US registry under contract to US DOC.
> > AFAICT, there are contingent liability problems otherwise, for NSI. This
> > is what I was saying four years ago, policies at the root registry push
> > down to the sub-registries and registrars. Especially, those that are
> > based in real laws. It all depends on the jurisdiction of the registry
> > and its upstream.
> >
> > --
> > IANAL = I Am Not A Lawyer. Before taking legal action based on anything I
> > say or write, you are strongly encouraged to seek the advice of an
> > attorney.
> >
> > --
> > R O E L A N D  M J  M E Y E R
> > Managing Director
> > Morgan Hill Software Company
> > tel: +1 925 373 3954
> > cel: +1 925 352 3615
> > fax: +1 925 373 9781
> > http://www.mhsc.com
> >
> > |> -----Original Message-----
> > |> From: Joseph [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > |> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 1:13 AM
> > |> To: Roeland Meyer
> > |> Subject: RE: [ga] The Network Solutions contribution to international
> > |> terror |> |> |> Hi Roeland, |> |>      <snip> ... Registrars are
> > simply resellers for Registry |> services. If they |> are registered with
> > NSI then NSI has an obligation to comply |> with US law. |> Downstream,
> > this means that non-REGISTRARs cannot register embargoed |> entities with
> > a US-based REGISTRY. [BTW, I don't see any |> legal exceptions |> for
> > ccTLD managers, under US embargo rulings, either.] |> *** Can you please
> > elaborate on the [text] please?  ccTLDs |> may/may not be |> managed by a
> > US company/incorporation. If I run a .my ccTLD |> registry, and my |>
> > country does not have a sanction/embargo against the |> registrant's
> > country, I |> [should] be able to accept the registration. |> |> |>
> > regards, |> - Joseph Lee (Fook Heng) |> ======================== |>
> >
> > --
> > 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-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: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:49:12 -0600
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: Re: [ga] The Network Solutions contribution to international	terror

IMHO our American Movie & Music rating system works rather well.

Why not incorporate this system into one we can work with online.

Technically the result of being classified as aggressive enough to be 
considered terrorist would result with the domain's resolution being 
forwarded to the equivalent of itself plus the TLD for known and presumed 
terrorists.

Censor by categorization; therefore avoiding censorship.

~k

- --
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, 03 Dec 2001 16:53:55 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Top Three Issues

Kristy and all assembly members,

  Ohhh yes he knows all right!  And he appointed an INternet Czar in one
Richard Clark to oversee and keep him updated.  Richard does a pretty
good job of it as well much to ICANN's schgrin....

Kristy McKee wrote:

> It's more likely that President Bush doesn't know it exists.
>
> ~k
>
> At 10:14 PM 12/3/2001 +1300, you wrote:
> >At 01:03 3/12/01 -0500, L Gallegos wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On 3 Dec 2001, at 17:37, Peter Dengate Thrush wrote:
> >>
> >> > If the USG ever feels that the ICANN which eventually presents itself does
> >> > not meet the terms of the White Paper, or any new conditions mandated by
> >> > the USG before transfer of technical management of the Legacy Root's names
> >> > and numbers, it will seek to have ICANN make any necessary changes, or
> >> > decline to transfer.
> >>
> >>And there's the real issue, IMO.  The USG DoC has repeatedly
> >>abrogated its responsibilties in oversight of ICANN.
> >
> >Leah,
> >
> >Could this be because from their p.o.v. ICANN is doing just fine?
> >Could it be that the White Paper is now considered as "something from the
> >Clinton administration" and best buried?
> >
> >--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
>
> --
> 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: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:59:38 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Final Review Task Force Report

Danny and all assembly members,

  Good points here Danny.  And this had been something that I have
been expressing for our [INEGroup] members for some time now.
Even long before you were around.  ICANN continues to "Go thru
the motions" but that's about it.  I just would like to see more
Internet press coverage on this myself...

[email-masked] wrote:

> Roeland,
>
> At MdR I asked quite a few different Board members whether they had discussed
> the GA vote on restructuring the DNSO.  They all replied "No".  The GA is
> simply not on their radar scope, and to the same degree that they don't want
> a Board that includes nine Karls and Andys, they don't want the troublesome
> participation of the GA.
>
> ICANN remains an organization that only gives lip-service to bottom-up
> participation, and as long as they can continue to state "whereas public
> comments were solicited", while ignoring every pertinent public comment that
> was tendered, we are going nowhere fast with this continued farce of
> participating in these task forces.
>
> Our full participatory rights are being denied to us.  If we don't fight for
> our rights with every means of protest available to us, the Council will not
> only continue to treat us like niggers, they will do all within their power
> to make sure that our voices are never heard.  Ask Joanna if she can
> successfully post to the Council list any longer...
>
> You indicate that a cannon is necessary... what do you propose?
> --
> 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, 4 Dec 2001 12:09:56 +1300
From: "Peter Dengate Thrush" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] NC Review Task Force -- Captured by Business Interests ??

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
To: "[ga]" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:18 AM
Subject: [ga] NC Review Task Force -- Captured by Business Interests ??

> Of the constituency members mentioned, we have:
>
> $$    Marilyn Cade, Business Constituency
> $$    Caroline Chicoine, IP Constituency
> $$    Paul Kane, Registrars Constituency
> ~$    Milton Mueller, NCDNH Constituency
> $$    Elizabeth Porteneuve, ccTLD Registries (Herald for Philip Sheppard)
> $$    Philip Sheppard, Business Constituency (also associated with IP)
>
> By my count, that's:
>
>     5 of 6 supporting business interests.
>     1 of 6 supporting nonprofits.
>     0 of 6 supporting individual registrants.
>
> Capture, anyone ??

I take great exception to your description of our delegate, Elisabeth
Porteneuve, as  a "herald" of Philip Shepherd. It impugns both her, and the
constituency which appointed her, and to whom she has been reporting and
consulting on this issue.

While I accept your passion, please don't let the rhetoric become your
enemy.

And, btw, the ccTLDs do not routinely support business interests, do not
routinely oppose non profits (InternetNZ is one), and many support
individual registrants.

- --
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, 03 Dec 2001 17:12:18 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Inflammatory Language

Patrick and all assembly members,

  I will restate what the president said recently and I also agree with.
"Those whom support terrorist, are terrorists.  Those countries
that harbor terrorists are terrorists. "
and The terrorists will be brought to justice or justice
will be brought to the terrorists".

  This is all the information  that we as GA members and
stakeholders need really.  Anything else is extra and possibly
interesting.  However web sites, registries, registrars, or
ISP's that have suspected terrorists of those that support
them are terrorists themselves and should be dealt with
accordingly.

  Oh yes, one more thing.  Ignorance of the law is not excuse...

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> Hi Joanna
>
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2001 08:40:41 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
>
> > We are in the middle of a War affecting world stability, the ramifications
> > of which are catastrophic loss of life and business. The new Global
> > Coalitions and Treaties on Terrorism and Cybercrime are impacting every
> > nation's ability to do business internationally. ICANN's own Registrar
> > Accreditation Agreement, clause 3.7.2, requires compliance with all
> > applicable laws, not only those in the US.
>
> Agreed.  In fact you can point to nobody on the GA list who disagrees.  Hence
> my comment that the GA list agrees that ICANN should comply with the law.
>
> Please prove otherwise.  We don't even need to a motion to that effect.
>
> > Against this background we have named terrorist groups openly using the DNS,
> > putting up websites in the legacy root and using them to promote their
> > illegal activities. These are not "freedom fighters", these are people
> > engaged in genocide, in Israel, in America and who knows where next.
>
> Let me make my position absolutely clear.
>
> There are, or may be, members of this list who belong to the Christian, Jewish
> and Islamic faiths.  There are, or may be, members of this list who support
> Israeli or Palestinian viewpoints.   There are, or may be, ccTLD managers
> on the GA list representing all of the current participants including
> countries such as Israel, Palestine, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, France,
> the United Kingdom and the United States.  Even Australia's involved.
>
> I consider it unwise and harmful in the extreme for GA members to use
> emotive language when discussing DNS issues.  In particular, I refer to the
> use of words like "slaughtered", "revenge", "Nazi", "martyrs", "jihad",
> "genocide" and so on.
>
> It really makes little difference whether you are using the words yourself or
> quoting websites.  If you do that, others can do likewise and "terrorism" has
> effectively scored the points that it seeks.  Fear and anger is generated and
> the economy continues to suffer.  I'm sure George W. Bush said that too.
>
> Or better yet, see this URL from the Terrorism Research Centre.  It says:
> http://www.terrorism.com/terrorism/bpart1.html
>
> > Second, attacks that may appear to be senseless and random are not. To
> > the perpetrators, their attacks make perfect sense.  Acts such as bombing
> > public places of assembly and shooting into crowded restaurants heighten
> > public anxiety.  This is the terrorists' immediate objective.
>
> > Third, the terrorist needs to publicize his attack. If no one knows about
> > it, it will not produce fear.  The need for publicity often drives target
> > selection; the greater the symbolic value of the target, the more publicity
> > the attack brings to the terrorists and the more fear it generates.
>
> I would put it to you that there are more appropriate forums for discussing
> such issues.  In fact, I am sure it is not beyond your wit to discuss the DNS
> issues, referencing Hamas or similar organisations if you will, without
> probing the wounds underlying the conflict.  Or without giving in to their
> objectives of creating anxiety and generating fear.
>
> I wrote:
>
> > If I am not mistaken Joanna Lane has already brought this to our attention.
>
> To which you replied:
>
> > Not me. John Berryhill is the expert. I questioned Stuart Lynn, who
> > responded that ICANN doesn't care who its Registrars sells Domain Names to.
>
> John Berryhill may have brought the issue to our attention but you have lifted
> the discussion to another level entirely.  Not once but several times.
>
> <snip>
>
> > I don't know about you, but I think they could at least be expressing deep
> > concern and telling the rest of the world that they will look into the
> > situation, and get back to us.
>
> Fine.  Make any proposal you like without the inflammatory language.
>
> > Is that off topic enough for you?
>
> It's attitudes like that, Joanna, that cause these wars in the first place.
> Try this instead:
>
> A Jewish lament:
>
> The Babylonians have swept into Jerusalem from the north, slaughtering
> the inhabitants and hauling others away to captivity.  And so we hear this
> morning's painful cries to God for his people "The hearts of the people cry
> out to the Lord.  Let your tears flow like a river day and night; give
> yourself no relief, your eyes no rest."  Lamentations 2:18.
>
> Or again:
>
> "Oh that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might
> weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people!" Jeremiah 9:1
>
> And an Islamic Hadidth:
>
> "O people weep, for if you cannot weep then make yourself weep.  Indeed
> the inhabitants of the hellfire will weep until their tears pour down their
> cheeks, as if they were streams until the tears are used up and then blood
> will pour down, and the eyes will be covered with ulcers."
>
> > Regards,
> > Joanna
>
> Regards
> 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

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: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:16:52 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] The Network Solutions contribution to international  terror

John and all assembly members,

  This is exactly right here John!  And thank you for yet again stating it
so clearly.  Well done!  >;)

John Palmer wrote:

> The solution to US control of the DNS is to make the USG root network
> irrelevant by
> supporting the inclusive namespace roots, such as PacficRoot, ORSC and
> Jefsey's
> business-oriented root in Europe.
>
> The best way to remove US control of the DNS is to take it away from them by
> not using *.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. Thats what we have been telling people for
> years.
>
> John
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William X Walsh" <[email-masked]>
> To: "Marc Schneiders" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:49 PM
> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] The Network Solutions contribution to international
> terror
>
> > Monday, Monday, December 03, 2001, 4:17:23 AM, Marc Schneiders wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, at 21:57 [=GMT+1300], Joop Teernstra wrote:
> > >> At 21:53 2/12/01 -0800, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >If we're taking votes the subject is really way off topic.
> > >>
> > >> Agree. Not only off topic, but also as a US law enforcement issue a
> major
> > >> noise generating subject in a global forum such as the GA list.
> >
> > > I have to disagree. The fact that people still find it a good idea (or
> > > do not even notice the problem) that the US controls worldwide DNS and
> > > imposes its political ideas and national law on the world, by
> > > determining who can register a domain and who not (even if terrorists)
> > > is very much on topic here. It is not only about liberty/freespeech,
> > > but also about US control of the DNS.
> >
> > Oh grow up.  No matter WHERE ICANN was located, they would have to
> > comply with the LOCAL and national laws where they are located.
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:25:35 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Terrorism, Joanna, Is Seriously Off Topic

Patrick and all assembly members,

  I must support Patricks conclusions on this as well unfortunately.
Althought I believe that Joanna has been a good advocate for her
own positions, many of which I agree with strongly as do many of
our [INEGroup] members, and other stakeholders, I could not
in good conscience support her given some of the antics that she
has most recently engaged in regarding TF's and the BC temp
chair Marilyn Cade.

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> Dear Danny
>
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:59:37 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg03352.html
>
> I understand that you continue in your position as Chair of the General
> Assembly.  In that role you have spent significant time and energy promoting
> Joanna Lane for every possible position you could think of.  In fact, you
> invented a few to promote her political ascent.
>
> During this time, a number of people, including myself, have questioned her
> unpleasant attitude.  In fact, Joanna has, to my knowledge, gratuitously
> offended several people.  Nor has she ever shown any accountability in
> promoting her own agenda.  She does not, for example, respond to any questions
> or even heed any attempts at moderation.
>
> It is my view that Joanna Lane is quite unsuited to represent the GA in any
> forum whatsoever.  I would suggest that you discontinue your support of
> Joanna's power grab unless and until you have been given a specific mandate by
> the Assembly membership.
>
> May I also suggest that you do something to resolve the running sore of list
> moderation.  You started with five people, as I remember, and you have none
> left.  That is a sorry reflection of your leadership style.  Otherwise the
> list will continue to degenerate.
>
> And it will become impossible for you to claim credibility with the power
> cliques.
>
> I ask that, in particular, because I wish you consider this email as a
> complaint against Joanna Lane's continuing insistence at off topic posting.
> You must be aware that a number of list participants have disagreed with
> Joanna's approach here.  In fact, it has divided the GA.
>
> So you must mediate Joanna's intransigence or see the proposed vote of no
> confidence in ICANN turn into a vote of no confidence in Danny Younger.
>
> You have deeply saddened me.  Please stop this.  Do it now.
>
> Regards
> Patrick Corliss
> cc [ga abuse]
>
> --
> 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: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 15:30:12 -0800
From: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Terrorism, Joanna, Is Seriously Off Topic

The ostrich is alive and well in Australia.

Bill Lovell

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> Dear Danny
>
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:59:37 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc08/msg03352.html
>
> I understand that you continue in your position as Chair of the General
> Assembly.  In that role you have spent significant time and energy promoting
> Joanna Lane for every possible position you could think of.  In fact, you
> invented a few to promote her political ascent.
>
> During this time, a number of people, including myself, have questioned her
> unpleasant attitude.  In fact, Joanna has, to my knowledge, gratuitously
> offended several people.  Nor has she ever shown any accountability in
> promoting her own agenda.  She does not, for example, respond to any questions
> or even heed any attempts at moderation.
>
> It is my view that Joanna Lane is quite unsuited to represent the GA in any
> forum whatsoever.  I would suggest that you discontinue your support of
> Joanna's power grab unless and until you have been given a specific mandate by
> the Assembly membership.
>
> May I also suggest that you do something to resolve the running sore of list
> moderation.  You started with five people, as I remember, and you have none
> left.  That is a sorry reflection of your leadership style.  Otherwise the
> list will continue to degenerate.
>
> And it will become impossible for you to claim credibility with the power
> cliques.
>
> I ask that, in particular, because I wish you consider this email as a
> complaint against Joanna Lane's continuing insistence at off topic posting.
> You must be aware that a number of list participants have disagreed with
> Joanna's approach here.  In fact, it has divided the GA.
>
> So you must mediate Joanna's intransigence or see the proposed vote of no
> confidence in ICANN turn into a vote of no confidence in Danny Younger.
>
> You have deeply saddened me.  Please stop this.  Do it now.
>
> Regards
> Patrick Corliss
> cc [ga abuse]
>
> --
> 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

- --

The URLs for Best Practices:
DNSO Citation:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/gaindex.html
(Under "Other Information Documents"; "August 2001:
Proposal for Best Practices for the DNSO GA." This
page also includes much else about the DNSO.)
Part I:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010813.GA-BestPractices.html
Part II:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010813.GA-BP-flowchart.pdf
(Access to the .pdf file requires the Adobe Acrobat Reader,
available for free down load at
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html.)
Part III:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010813.GA-BP-PartIII.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, 4 Dec 2001 10:29:52 +1100
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] ICANN's Mission Creep -- Censorship

Hi Joanna

On Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:59:37 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
> on 12/3/01 11:31 AM, Marc Schneiders at [email-masked] wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > Everyone has a right to freedom of speech.
>
> An act of murder is not freedom of speech. These websites are not just
> putting out political viewpoints, they are inciting terrorist acts of
> violence . . .

<snip>

> Am I wrong?

Nobody is supporting terrorism.

> What makes you think that defending a terrorist website is going to uphold
> freedom of speech for internet users? Freedom of speech on the internet is
> being murdered on a daily basis by ICANN's "friendly fire". The GA is the
> "collateral damage" at the alter of a false god called "Stability".

I don't believe Marc is "defending a terrorist website".  He is simply saying
that decisions on individual websites should be made by the appropriate
authorities under the law.

I share his view that promoting censorship is destroying our freedom.  As
George W. Bush said, the issue is a struggle between "Freedom and Fear".  It
is clear that you are not on the side of "freedom".

<snip>

> Yes, auctions of Nazi memorabilia, and Yahoo lost that battle because the
> courts viewed it as glorification of the holocaust (if memory serves me
> correctly) and as a consequence, it is now against the law worldwide,
> virtually. What makes you think the courts are going to treat those who
> glorify any other atrocity any different?

It is not "against the law worlwide" simply in France.  What the Courts do is
up to the Courts, not Joanna Lane.

> On this we agree, if only for the same reason the holocaust should never be
> forgotten (ref ED: Always make new mistakes). Have you actually looked at
> the Palestine-info.com website recently Marc? Celebrating the mass murder of
> innocent Israeli children is not my idea of "telling the Palestinian side of
> the story". And advocating to shut down a website that is doing just that,
> is reason enough.

No, Joanna.  A website breaching the rules against sanctions is quite
different than one which has unsavoury content.  Unless, of course, the
content itself breaches the law which in this case it probably does not.
However, IANAL.

Any suspected breaches of the law should be reported to the proper
authorities.  You could probably do that all on your own.

> The Somaliarefreshment.com site is a totally different story, being a
> website whose content is not inciting anarchy per se, but whose registrant
> is, and has been specifically named as providing financial support to those
> who would obliterate every American and Israeli from the face of the planet.
> For me, this is not a question of withdrawing political freedoms of speech,
> but of denying a privilege, the privilege to profiteer in the societies it
> seeks to destroy. It is no different from stopping Bin Laden purchasing
> satellite phones on Long Island, or freezing a bank account in Switzerland.

You can be as emotive as you like.  It is either against the law or it is not.
If it is against the law it should be reported to the proper authorities.

<snip>

> So far as I know, nobody is asking ICANN to make any
> decisions. Clause 3.7.2 simply requires the Registrars to comply with the
> law, without stipulating what those laws are, which is as it should be, but
> I really don't think it is unreasonable to recommend an ICANN policy that
> allows for sanctions against any Registrar that deliberately and knowingly
> breaches clause 3.7.2 of the Accreditation Agreement, including financial
> penalties and/or in the most sever cases, removing their Accreditation
> status (obviously with prior warning).

It is not at all reasonable, Joanna, as that would be a very clear invitation
to "mission creep".  The truth is that ICANN could, like yourself, report any
offending lawbreaker to the proper authorities at any time.

If I were a registrar, I would simply report any issue that ICANN raised to
the appropriate authorities.  That would completely negate ICANN's power to do
any censorship.  I'd then tell ICANN to go away and leave me alone.

I'm sure that many registrars, particularly those overseas, would have a very
strong argument against ICANN for "restraint of trade" and all sort of civil
wrongs.

> If you're saying that the Registrars need to go to Court to determine *how*
> they must uphold the law,

I completely missed such an interpretation.  Once the issue has been raised,
it is likely that, after consulting legal advice, a reasonable registrar would
only need to send a letter to the appropriate authorities then sit back and
wait.  Other scenarios aren't worth hypothesising over.

> I disagree with respect to the very obvious
> examples that have been cited. In the unlikely event that a genuine
> Registrant is mistakenly shut down, they would have legal recourse, so I'm
> only suggesting Registrants take immediate action in the most obvious cases,
> of which ut cannot be denied there are quite a few.

As far as I understand it this is the first time you've actually made any such
suggestion.  Most of the time to date you have been campaigning.  As I clearly
suggested, make your proposals, whatever they are, without the inflasmmatory
language.

> Why prevaricate? NetSol
> can shut down palestine-info.com and somaliarefreshment.com tomorrow if it
> wants, one phone call from Stuart Lynn would do it, one two sentence
> statement on the ICANN website referring to the relevant laws would do it,
> whereas to do otherwise is to support Hamas and Al Barakat, which so far as
> I understand things, *is* breaking the law (IANAL*).

Why indeed Joanna?  Write a letter to Stuart Lynn with your clearly described
proposals, copy to the list, and I'm sure he will reply.  Or use your Best
Practices Guidelines which you've said often enough took you six months to
produce.

> Now who is picking fluff out of their navel?

No comment.

> I am also taking this opportunity to respond briefly to Patrick's post,

You never respond to my posts, Joanna.  You just do enough to pretend to.

> which attaempts to debate semantics with a person in a war zone using the
> tone of a person sitting on a beach drinking shirley temples. It is not fair
> to shoot the messenger on the basis of using scary language that is outside

It is a "beat up" Joanna.  And you know it.  I have said repeatedly that you
should stay on topic which as far as I understand it is websites which are
breaching sanctions or some other rule of law.

However, as you want to extend this scope to include all forms of "mission
creep" and "content censorship" you are using emotive language to win support.

What you don't realise, however, is that you are just showing immaturity.

> the normal comfort zone, when all that is happening is that the story is
> being told as it really is. No apologies for lack of "Politically correct"
> speech. I am not going to apologize to any members of Hamas that may be
> members of this group and there are plenty of Palestinians who would agree
> with me.

That's a distortion as you well know.  You can say whatever you like about
Hamas or anybody else on any forum that is designed for that purpose.

We are here to discuss the DNS.  It's a pity you can't understand that.

> Regards,
> Joanna
>
> IANAL - I am not a lawyer. Anything I say is my personal opinion and not in
> any sense legal advice.

Me too.

Regards
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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #901
************************