Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #918
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST         Wednesday, December 12 2001         Volume 01 : Number 918

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

Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:33:49 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OBJECTION Re: Transfer TF elections

Thomas and all assembly members,

Thomas Roessler wrote:

> On 2001-12-11 15:15:54 -0600, Kristy McKee wrote:
>
> >I do not understand Thomas's objection and seems to not be
> >willihng or possible able to articulate it to me.
>
> First of all, it's getting late in my time zone.
>
> Second, I usually don't respond to individuals who send me "F**k You
> Too" notes via private e-mail half an hour before asking questions
> in public.

  Hummm?  Interesting converse positioning here Thomas.  But not
unexpected by me anyway.  You seem to first believe that private
posts are not for public consumption on the one hand, and yet on
the other hand make a point of commenting on someone's private
post to you publicly...  Very curious indeed.  Than to top it off,
you seem to be complaining about the potential comment
made to you off the public record, publicly.  Simply amazing,
but disgusting, SPIN!

>
>
> Third, I consider Jeff Williams and Eric Dierker unsuitable and
> unable to serve on any Names Council task force (or the like).  I'm
> sure that any attempt to work together with any one of them in order
> to represent the GA in a meaningful and coherent way would require
> an awful lot of time and effort, and would ultimately be futile.

  Perhaps so much exertion is more than you can muster.  I am sorry to
hear that.  I hope anyone suffering such inadequacies will seek a way
of correcting such, or improving so as to aid in such a correction...

>  I
> prefer not to waste my time on obviously futile efforts. Also (as I
> pointed out in my original message), I'd have to reconsider whether
> or not I want to represent this GA in the case that Eric or Jeff
> would be sent to the Task Force.  Because, in this case, the GA's
> collective and my personal idea of what constitutes good judgement
> would obviously be in complete contradiction.

  Ah, so you individual judgment is superior than to the collective
judgment of the DNSO GA members perhaps?  I do hope you
are not seriously thinking such.

>
>
> Fourth, the part of my message Jon was referring to concerned
> procedural issues: In Danny's original message which called for
> candidates, there was no mention at all of any observers being sent
> to the TF on behalf of the GA. I, for instance, have declared my
> interest based on the expectation that I'd represent the GA alone,
> or not at all.

  Well no one can adequately represent the GA alone in it's current
form or in any other form as an ASSEMBLY.

>
>
> If I had known that runner-ups are expected to be sent to the TF,
> too, I'd either have tried to make sure that there are other
> candidates I find suitable for the task force, or I'd have refrained
>  from a candidature.

  You are free to do fine other candidates regardless.  You are also
just a free to decline the candidacy as well.  It would seem to me
that perhaps you should decline to become a candidate given your
untenable and unreasonable position.  However I would have no
problem working with any of my fellow DNSO GA assembly members
as observers.  In fact I welcome them, each and every one in the
true and proud tradition of the Internet!  >;)

>
>
> This kind of change of rules is inappropriate at this point of time
> (i.e., when the election is almost started).

  What rule are you referring to?  Please be specific.

>  Instead of changing
> the meaning of a candidature and a vote at this point of time, the
> GA membership should either be given an opportunity to decide on
> this question by vote, too, or the vote should happen by the rules
> which were to be expected from Danny's original announcement.

  I agree that any policy position should be approved by vote of
ALL or the DNSO GA members before being accepted as
such a policy position.

>
>
> --
> Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/
> --
> 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, 11 Dec 2001 18:21:16 -0500
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?

Well, William, it seems that you haven't looked into this.  This dotusa 
person gets shut off by one ISP and moves to another.  He'll be reported 
on this also.  He is the one that duplicated .god and several others and 
continues to do the same thing over and over again.  John Palmer is 
NOT the one doing it and .USA has been an ADNS domain and John is 
pursuing action against this other individual.  dotusa domains do not 
resolve.  ADNS .USA does resolve and always has.  John Palmer does 
not spam.

So let's characterize it properly.  Yes, there is a spammer using 
dotusa.com.  It is NOT the long standing ADNS domain.  The spammer 
is constantly reported as a spammer at each ISP he lands on and they 
sytematically shut him down.  Hopefully one day he'll run out of ISPs.

Leah

On 11 Dec 2001, at 13:58, William X Walsh wrote:

> 
> I received the below spam at one of our domains today, interesting to
> see that the alt.root .usa people are resorting to spam to advertise
> their services.
> 
> 
> Return-path: <[email-masked]>
> Envelope-to: [email-masked]
> Delivery-date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800
> Received: from [211.15.46.134] (helo=bstep01.bstep.co.jp)
>         by elrond.dso.net with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #19)
>         id 16Dujd-0000Bd-00
>         for [email-masked]; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800
> Received: from zv (m133-mp1-cvx3c.bre.ntl.com [62.255.104.133]) by
> bstep01.bstep.co.jp with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service
> Version 5.5.2653.13)
>         id YLRYXCA6; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 06:53:04 +0900
> From: [email-masked]
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Latest Domain Name .USA! 95772
> Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800
> 
> 
> The latest domain name extension has arrived .USA!!!  It's the fresh, new,
> 
> exciting web address that is taking the world by storm.
> 
> 
> 
> Who wants to be .com when you can now be .USA 
> 
> 
> 
> Register your .USA domain name today exclusively at: 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dotusa.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> To be taken off the mailing list please click below:
> 
> http://195.224.231.236/unsubscribe.phtml
> 
> --
> 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, 11 Dec 2001 17:43:48 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Casting False aspersions?  to - [ga] Re:  OBJECTION Re: Transfer TF elections

WXW and all assembly members,

  I wonder of you have any rebuttal to the substance of Danny's
post rather than attacking the messenger(Danny)?

William X Walsh wrote:

> Oh give it up, Danny, you know you are only doing this since it serves
> your purpose of trying to be as much a thorn in the side of the NC as
> you can.
>
> At least be honest about your reasons for doing it.
>
> I bet a number on this list wished they had backed up my call for the
> NC to replace you earlier this year.
>
> Tuesday, Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 1:44:19 PM, [email-masked] wrote:
>
> > The General Assembly will be electing a single "voting" representative to the
> > Transfers Task Force.
>
> > This Task Force, as per an un-ratified proposal tendered by the un-elected
> > interim Chair, will determine whether constituencies and the GA may send
> > additional non-voting "observers" to this TF.  That particular message was
> > posted to the TF list on the same day that I tendered my resignation from the
> > TF, and has subsequently been repeated on the TF list.
>
> > I consider it entirely appropriate that those that have expressed an interest
> > in participating in this TF be given the fair opportunity to participate, and
> > have therefore asked the Secretariat to designate the runners-up in this
> > election as such "observers" (recognizing that no other GA members have
> > expressed any interest in working on this TF and understanding that the
> > number of future TF participants must ultimately be decided by the TF
> > membership itself).
>
> > Had this been an open working group, all members of the GA would have had an
> > equal opportunity to participate.  Accordingly, I will not seek to deny
> > participation to the only GA members that have thus far expressed any
> > interest or desire in working on this TF.
>
> > Allow me to remind the membership that the General Assembly is "open to all
> > who are willing to contribute effort to the work of the DNSO. The
> > participants in the GA should be individuals who have a knowledge of and an
> > interest in issues pertaining to the areas for which the DNSO has primary
> > responsibility, and who are willing to contribute time, effort and expertise
> > to the work of the DNSO, including work item proposal and development,
> > discussion of work items, draft document preparation, and participation in
> > research and drafting committees and working groups."
>
> > Jeff Williams, Thomas Roessler and Eric Dierker have an equal right as
> > participants as they are all General Assembly members.  It is up to the
> > membership to decide which candidate will best represent our interests as the
> > voting member.  The runners-up in this election (having expressed a desire to
> > participate in the work of the TF) will be accorded the opportunity to do so
> > should such circumstance arise.
>
> > Those that do not plan to get involved in the substantive work of the DNSO
> > should allow those that are willing to do the work to get on with the job
> > that they are volunteering to do.  Maybe next time, others will volunteer to
> > actually do some work.
>
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William 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

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, 11 Dec 2001 16:04:30 -0800
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Elections

|> From: Eric Dierker [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 1:29 AM

|> I just got about six private offers to help fund - if, if, 
|> if, if.  Well, I still hate you for your methodology, but 
|> I thank you for raising awareness, you snake.

"snake", in some circles, has very specific meaning. Are you invoking that
meaning here?

|> Everybody just hold up.  We won't start funding until after 
|> the Chair elections. Please get out there and speak.
|> If my people do not see some oomph then kiss it good-bye.  I 

Even if they do see some oomph, how do we know this promise is any more
credible than any of the others? How are they going to pump money into the
GA, past the ICANN BoD and the DNSO/NC? We've been down this garden path
before, I recognize the feet prints. You don't have to name names but,
what's the plan?

|> have signed a couple on to monitor the list and do some 
|> weird Auto forwarding to a few more. (techno geeks)
|> 
|> By Jeffs' fiat I will move forward and all I ask is a tiny 
|> input from about 200 of you.  No I do not want your money 
|> I want your voices spoken here.

To keep the GA alive for a few months longer?

|> And to the three of you who have asked, no.  But thank you. 
|> I am not a politician but a manipulator.

There's a difference? Oh yeah, the politician isn't quite so blatant about
it.

IMHO, the DNSO/NC doesn't deserve a GA that they are not going to budget
for. Neither does the ICANN/BoD. 

Failing that, funding the GA is an awful lot like a Mexican farmer expecting
to get irrigation water from the Colorado River. By the time it gets to him,
it's a mud trickle ... barely damp ground. Both the ICANN/BoD and the
DNSO/NC are upstream and have dams in place. Any money you put into that
pipe will hit those dams and be diverted, anywhere but to the DNSO/GA. I
hope that your money sources realize that.

Are they planning to do like Markle and fund individuals directly? If so,
that's about the only way it'll happen and for that to work, they'd have to
be non-specific as to whom gets funded. 
- --
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, 11 Dec 2001 16:17:07 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?

Tuesday, Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 3:21:16 PM, L Gallegos wrote:

> Well, William, it seems that you haven't looked into this.  This dotusa 
> person gets shut off by one ISP and moves to another.  He'll be reported 
> on this also.  He is the one that duplicated .god and several others and 
> continues to do the same thing over and over again.  John Palmer is 
> NOT the one doing it and .USA has been an ADNS domain and John is 
> pursuing action against this other individual.  dotusa domains do not 
> resolve.  ADNS .USA does resolve and always has.  John Palmer does 
> not spam.

I never said John Palmer was behind 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, 11 Dec 2001 17:38:16 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Elections

Roeland thank you for your very helpful post here.  The whole post is full of
very insightful matters but let me just address one at this time

Roeland Meyer wrote:

>
>
> Failing that, funding the GA is an awful lot like a Mexican farmer expecting
> to get irrigation water from the Colorado River. By the time it gets to him,
> it's a mud trickle ... barely damp ground. Both the ICANN/BoD and the
> DNSO/NC are upstream and have dams in place. Any money you put into that
> pipe will hit those dams and be diverted, anywhere but to the DNSO/GA. I
> hope that your money sources realize that.
>
> Are they planning to do like Markle and fund individuals directly? If so,
> that's about the only way it'll happen and for that to work, they'd have to
> be non-specific as to whom gets funded.
> --

This looks to me to be the only way to get it done.  "a stipend for the
person(s) fulfilling the role of the Chair(s)
of the GA."  There would have to be assurances against directing the activities
of said chairs.

So then Roeland gets elected Chair, now someone would be able to gift to him.
If you get ten at ten thousand you could actually make it a full time job.  I
would rather split the funding between two chairs and also use more of the money
for expenses.  Or even a third that could actually act as a parliamentarian.

Sincerely,
Eric

- --
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, 12 Dec 2001 10:03:08 +0800
From: Joseph <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?

Hi WXW,
	Glad to see you back :-)   Anyway, to add to the fire. .. I've been
receiving something like 30+ email from this www.infoGrab.com promoting
their .biz registration (over 3 mailbox in about 2 months).  Guess what,
their "remove me" link does not work.  Also filtering the sender does not
work either as they're smart and uses a different sender name each time.
This is frustrating...

best regards,
- - Joseph LEE (Fook Heng)
=============================

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of William X
Walsh
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:59 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?

I received the below spam at one of our domains today, interesting to
see that the alt.root .usa people are resorting to spam to advertise
their services.

Delivery-date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800
bstep01.bstep.co.jp with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service
Version 5.5.2653.13)
        id YLRYXCA6; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 06:53:04 +0900
From: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Subject: Latest Domain Name .USA! 95772
Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800

The latest domain name extension has arrived .USA!!!  It's the fresh, new,

exciting web address that is taking the world by storm.

Who wants to be .com when you can now be .USA

Register your .USA domain name today exclusively at:

http://www.dotusa.com

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

To be taken off the mailing list please click below:

http://195.224.231.236/unsubscribe.phtml

- --
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, 11 Dec 2001 18:33:14 -0800
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Elections

|> From: Eric Dierker [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 5:38 PM
|> 
|> Roeland Meyer wrote:
|> > Failing that, funding the GA is an awful lot like a 
|> > Mexican farmer expecting to get irrigation water 
|> > from the Colorado River. By the time it gets to him,
|> > it's a mud trickle ... barely damp ground. Both the 
|> > ICANN/BoD and the DNSO/NC are upstream and have dams 
|> > in place. Any money you put into that pipe will hit 
|> > those dams and be diverted, anywhere but to the 
|> > DNSO/GA. I hope that your money sources realize that.
|> >
|> > Are they planning to do like Markle and fund 
|> > individuals directly? If so, that's about the only 
|> > way it'll happen and for that to work, they'd have to
|> > be non-specific as to whom gets funded.
|> 
|> This looks to me to be the only way to get it done.  "a 
|> stipend for the person(s) fulfilling the role of the Chair(s)
|> of the GA."  There would have to be assurances against 
|> directing the activities of said chairs.
|> 
|> So then Roeland gets elected Chair, now someone would be 
|> able to gift to him. If you get ten at ten thousand you 
|> could actually make it a full time job.  

Four ICANN meetings per year, at $1000 "freight and storage" (travel and
hotel)expenses each, come out to $4000 per year. This is just to meet the
ICANN travel expenses and support for the mandatory trips of the GA chair.
IMHO, this is the main reason no one wants to step up to that plate. In
addition, Roberto brought out another point last year. The GA chair,
traveling to all of these meetings, would be burning all of their personal
vacation time, unless their employer gave them leave time, or they owned
their own business. Such leave time is usually unpaid, therefore we are also
talking about four weeks loss of income, per year. This is a serious loss,
of quality time and income, for their families. 

This is assuming that they are a salaried employee somewhere. BTW, whilst
most Europeans can get 4 weeks vacation, very few Americans can. This can
easily be monetized to $1-2K per trip. On the low side, this would all total
out at $8,000 per year. $10,000 would be a more adequate figure, for ONE
person's expenses, IMHO. At that level, they are still not covering their
day-to-day expenses, nor are they eating much at all. It is still not
funding a full-time commitment. Rather, only the actual ICANN
conventions/meetings.

|> I would rather split the funding between two chairs and 
|> also use more of the money for expenses. Or even a third 
|> that could actually act as a parliamentarian.

Personally, as I have stated before, I can see justification for a advocate
(speaker) and a consensus builder(chair-person). I can also see them as
full-time jobs. I can also see a Secretariate and some admin staff(1-2) but,
not full-time.
- --
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, 11 Dec 2001 18:35:05 -0800
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?

|> From: William X Walsh [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 4:17 PM
|> 
|> Tuesday, Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 3:21:16 PM, L Gallegos wrote:
|> 
|> > Well, William, it seems that you haven't looked into this. 
|>  This dotusa 
|> > person gets shut off by one ISP and moves to another.  
|> He'll be reported 
|> > on this also.  He is the one that duplicated .god and 
|> several others and 
|> > continues to do the same thing over and over again.  John 
|> Palmer is 
|> > NOT the one doing it and .USA has been an ADNS domain and John is 
|> > pursuing action against this other individual.  dotusa 
|> domains do not 
|> > resolve.  ADNS .USA does resolve and always has.  John Palmer does 
|> > not spam.
|> 
|> I never said John Palmer was behind it.

So, what was your point?
- --
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, 11 Dec 2001 18:50:17 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[4]: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?

Tuesday, Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 6:35:05 PM, Roeland Meyer wrote:

|>> From: William X Walsh [mailto:[email-masked]]
|>> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 4:17 PM
|>> 
|>> Tuesday, Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 3:21:16 PM, L Gallegos wrote:
|>> 
|>> > Well, William, it seems that you haven't looked into this. 
|>>  This dotusa 
|>> > person gets shut off by one ISP and moves to another.  
|>> He'll be reported 
|>> > on this also.  He is the one that duplicated .god and 
|>> several others and 
|>> > continues to do the same thing over and over again.  John 
|>> Palmer is 
|>> > NOT the one doing it and .USA has been an ADNS domain and John is 
|>> > pursuing action against this other individual.  dotusa 
|>> domains do not 
|>> > resolve.  ADNS .USA does resolve and always has.  John Palmer does 
|>> > not spam.
|>> 
|>> I never said John Palmer was behind it.

> So, what was your point?

Exactly what I said in the original email.

- -- 
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, 11 Dec 2001 22:22:42 -0500 (EST)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OBJECTION Re: Transfer TF elections

This seems quite persuasive to me.

On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Thomas Roessler wrote:

> This kind of change of rules is inappropriate at this point of time 
> (i.e., when the election is almost started).  Instead of changing 
> the meaning of a candidature and a vote at this point of time, the 
> GA membership should either be given an opportunity to decide on 
> this question by vote, too, or the vote should happen by the rules 
> which were to be expected from Danny's original announcement.
> 
- -- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                        -->It's warm here.<--

- --
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, 11 Dec 2001 21:01:37 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OBJECTION Re: Transfer TF elections

Quite right it does "seem" persuasive.  Until you examine the underlying
premise.  Perhaps I am mistaken but I cannot find any reference to the
rules that this premise requires to be persuasive. No rules for the
election of TF members, no rules for the determination of who shall be on
task forces from the GA.  The closest we find is the rule as set forth
earlier today by our chair and it certainly is not persuasive to this
premise.

In fact it is persuasive in showing this argument to be what it is
Obstructionism.

(funny but this also shows the wrongness of TFs versus WG)

Eric

"open to all
who are willing to contribute effort to the work of the DNSO. The
participants in the GA should be individuals who have a knowledge of and
an
interest in issues pertaining to the areas for which the DNSO has primary

responsibility, and who are willing to contribute time, effort and
expertise
to the work of the DNSO, including work item proposal and development,
discussion of work items, draft document preparation, and participation
in
research and drafting committees and working groups."

"Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" wrote:

> This seems quite persuasive to me.
>
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
> > This kind of change of rules is inappropriate at this point of time
> > (i.e., when the election is almost started).  Instead of changing
> > the meaning of a candidature and a vote at this point of time, the
> > GA membership should either be given an opportunity to decide on
> > this question by vote, too, or the vote should happen by the rules
> > which were to be expected from Danny's original announcement.
> >
> --
>                 Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  | http://www.law.tm
>                         -->It's warm here.<--
>
> --
> 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, 11 Dec 2001 22:24:10 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?

I will be point blank here.  Is this within the GA mission?  If it is then I
ask that some of you with great
technical expertise help this fine dotcommoner deal with this frustration.  I
have emailed on this matter
privately and find it most disturbing but also of a technical manner beyond my
expertise.

My humility beseeches for some of you more trained in such matters to look into
this matter.  From a
strictly policy point of view I have this to say;

The UDRP and our ugly Transfer Problems seem to prey upon the poorer among us.
Those who can afford the time and money for lawyers and gunslingers and such
prevail.  This is not new on a frontier, this is the rule until civilized
control can catch up to expansion.  I like to think that we in the GA are the
expansion of civilization upon the dynamic frontier of the Internet.

And so I ask if this issue on routing around spamming controls and the previous
KPMG issue of linking are within our mission?  It sure seems as though some are
abusing Domain Names with impunity.

Please write to Joseph and help him, and by extension all of us.

Sincerely,
Eric

Joseph wrote:

> Hi WXW,
>         Glad to see you back :-)   Anyway, to add to the fire. .. I've been
> receiving something like 30+ email from this www.infoGrab.com promoting
> their .biz registration (over 3 mailbox in about 2 months).  Guess what,
> their "remove me" link does not work.  Also filtering the sender does not
> work either as they're smart and uses a different sender name each time.
> This is frustrating...
>
> best regards,
> - Joseph LEE (Fook Heng)
> =============================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of William X
> Walsh
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:59 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [ga] Alt.root'ers resorting to spam?
>
> I received the below spam at one of our domains today, interesting to
> see that the alt.root .usa people are resorting to spam to advertise
> their services.
>
> Return-path: <[email-masked]>
> Envelope-to: [email-masked]
> Delivery-date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800
> Received: from [211.15.46.134] (helo=bstep01.bstep.co.jp)
>         by elrond.dso.net with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #19)
>         id 16Dujd-0000Bd-00
>         for [email-masked]; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800
> Received: from zv (m133-mp1-cvx3c.bre.ntl.com [62.255.104.133]) by
> bstep01.bstep.co.jp with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service
> Version 5.5.2653.13)
>         id YLRYXCA6; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 06:53:04 +0900
> From: [email-masked]
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Latest Domain Name .USA! 95772
> Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800
>
> The latest domain name extension has arrived .USA!!!  It's the fresh, new,
>
> exciting web address that is taking the world by storm.
>
> Who wants to be .com when you can now be .USA
>
> Register your .USA domain name today exclusively at:
>
> http://www.dotusa.com
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To be taken off the mailing list please click below:
>
> http://195.224.231.236/unsubscribe.phtml
>
> --
> 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, 11 Dec 2001 22:51:32 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Transfer

I figured that since someone out there was saying that they could not
work with me that perhaps they should know what I think about transfers
and the problems faced by IDNH, ISPs and the registrars.

There is no simple solution.  I understand and am sympathetic to the
registrars' contractual and liability problems.

I understand the frustration and incomprehensibleness of the system to
Individuals.

I full appreciate the danger and damage caused by faulty procedures and
the ramifications to ISPs.

I am also fully aware of the moral indignation of the user community
when procedures are manipulated to the loss of the user.

But I am very confident that the motivations of all can be brought to a
common understanding in the spirit of compromise.  As a GIS I am working
on some models for some developing ccTLDs and welcome the opportunity to
work with professionals that share a desire to produce solutions and
route around problems that look antagonistic to working models.

I do not think TR knows me.  I think that he would find that once I
scraped some mud off my boots, removed my hat and took a shower I am not
so repulsive.  But sometimes the combination of my once being a lawyer
and now being a Lay Minister causes some to hate me out of hand.  So be
it, I cannot change my past or present avocations to suit everyone.

Sincerely,
Eric

- --
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, 11 Dec 2001 23:07:18 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Transfer

Tuesday, Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 10:51:32 PM, Eric Dierker wrote:

> I do not think TR knows me.  I think that he would find that once I
> scraped some mud off my boots, removed my hat and took a shower I am not
> so repulsive.  But sometimes the combination of my once being a lawyer
> and now being a Lay Minister causes some to hate me out of hand.  So be
> it, I cannot change my past or present avocations to suit everyone.

It has nothing to do with your past or current occupations, but quite
frankly with the way you conduct yourself, and have conducted
yourself, on this forum and related forums.

Your occupation, or past occupation, where you live, what you eat for
breakfast, none of that has anything to do with the issues raised by
TR and others in regard to this matter, so you can stop trying to make
it out like you are being persecuted.   It's not believable.

- -- 
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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #918
************************