good morning all (i think it's morning here in singapore.. after flying and waiting in airports for 37.5 hours in the last 2 days) i have been travelling for the last 3-4 days but monitoring my e-mail closely... you know ..ITS REALLY GETTING PRETTY SAD ...... on all sides all i see is sniping and personal attacks (and this is the case on both lists). we seem to be more obsessed with "who gave money to who ?" (as if $500 or $1000 is going to drastically affect either stef's or kent's perspectives). its gotten to the point where a full 25-35% of all the mail on the lists are some useless sort of allusion or criticism of one person and it's coming from both sides.. i would like to personally commend kilnam chon and others like anthony, tadao, mikki and roberto and jay who are "trying like hell" to keep these lists focused on their original purpose. i would be inclined to say that the next few days here in singapore are pretty dam critical and we need appeal to all parties involved to try not to get "too distracted" best wishes to all ken stubbs p.s. one additional favor... it would really help if all of us would please try to keep the subject line of your messages more relevent to the content (i kept the above subject line up just to show how far we have drifted on this thread) Original Message----- From: Roeland M.J. Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Saturday, February 27, 1999 5:24 AM Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: Time out Re: ORSC Protest of NIST Solicitation No. 52SBNT9C1020 >At 02:27 PM 2/25/99 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote: > >>That's very creative. Stef. Perhaps you could point me to the >>hundreds of mail messages from you that are "harshly critical" of NSI? >>In all honesty, I don't remember a *single* one. > >Stef is a person of moderation, he wasn't overly harsh of CORE either. Are >you saying that this makes him friendly to CORE? I have seen him voice >critique of both. > >>However, I could easily go through my archives and pull down a random >>sample of 50 or so messages from you that are indeed harshly >>critical of IAHC/CORE/ICANN/IANA etc. I think, in fact, that the >>objective external observer would say that NSI and ORSC have been in >>bed for some time now. > >Where do you get this from? MHSC supports the ORSC position, are you saying >that MHSC is "in bed" with NSI? Although I have criticized NSI dispute >resolution policy severely, I have also written in support of a measured >approach wrt NSI. That said, I don't think you can get anyone to believe >that MHSC is an NSI supporter. At least, no one who has ever read one of my >posts on the subject. > >I have long made it a practice to avoid appearing to speak for ORSC, as >only Stef is authorized to do so. However, this once, I will speak in >defence of ORSC. The goals of the ORSC are clearly stated on the >www.open-rsc.org web-site. There are no hidden agenda, that I know about. >ORSC activity, in the past year and WRT IFWP, have given me absolute >confidence in ORSC dealing, reputation, and motives, to be exactly as >stated in official communications. Were this not the case, MHSC and ORSC >would have parted company long ago. Please note, this does not mean that >MHSC is in 100% agreement with ALL of ORSC views. Any group has its >internal disagreements, but we have a common goal. > >I would say that your external observer has been "coached". > > >___________________________________________________ >Roeland M.J. Meyer - >e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com >Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer >Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com >___________________________________________________ > KISS ... gotta love it! > > >
