William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On Mon, 31 May 1999 19:30:00 +0100, Jeff Williams
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >William and all,
> >
> > I am afraid it is difficult to follow your logic here. If an
> >organization
> >is by design non-commercial it necessarily follows that commercial
> >entities should not, in and of themselves be allowed as members,
> >otherwise it is no longer a non-commercial organization.
> >
> > On the other hand, commercial interests should be supportive of
> >non-commercial entities to formulate their own Constituency as it is
> >a healthy thing for the broader Stakeholder community as well as the
> >long term health of their own organizations as well. This makes
> >IMHO, the actions of the ISOC questionable on their face.
> >
>
> No problem there. My point is with the concept of non-commercial and
> anti-commercial and Mr Sondow's confusion of the two.
I don't see Michael as "Anti" Commercial. This is a point of view
of course, but I seem to notice that most of the post surrounding
this issue are in agreement with that viewpoint. Others mileage may
indeed vary, such a yours. You propensity to engage in "Which Hunting"
as Richard Sexton pointed out in an earlier post on a different
thread would bare this contention out.
>
>
> The NCDNHC should not be run by :
>
> 1) Someone who lacked credibility in their person, so they created an
> entity to try and get credibility. (the proper way would be to have
> credibility as an individual and use the entity to enhance and
> contribute to that). (This excludes Mr Sondow and the ICIIU)
This is an assertion of YOURS as I eluded to above. It may be shared by
a few, but a tiny few that surely is. Hence it is not reasonable to
follow
such a contention to YOUR desired conclusion and if done so, would be
a travesty that would be both unjustified and certainly not grounded
in established fact. This sort of Malosavich propaganda sort of
approach is not befitting a reasonable behavioral norm.
>
>
> 2) Organizations who predominately represent the interests of
> commercial organizations. (This excludes the ISOC).
Correct, a nd this is part of my original point in contrast and
contention to
your previous comment on this thread. So, make up your mind! It is
plainly
clear that the ISOC is plainly attempting to "Capture" or subvert the
NCDNHC
to it's own yet to be know purposes. This effort is plainly being lead by
Don Heath, and Don is not interested in being reasonable which has been
his long history dating back several years now as many of us are well
aware of.
>
>
> Commercial interests supporting the ICIIU are doing so for the purpose
> of trying to present a united front against the ISOC, and my
> contention remains that to accept one evil in the name of preventing
> another is not acceptable for something as important as this.
This would be a reasonable contention if the ICIIU and the creation of
the
NCDNHC constituency by Michael Sondow was indeed properly defined
as evil. As has been noticed in the rapid exchange of posts in this
regard
YOUR contention that the ICAIIU is evil, certainly remains questionable at
best.
>
>
> I again renew my call for someone else to assume leadership in the
> formation of this constituency. It should be someone mostly beyond
> reproach (there goes Sondow and Heath), and yet with a solid grounding
> on the noncommercial uses and interests in the internet.
I personally agree with this suggestion, but such a person is not likely
to
exist in fact. Anyone that is human is not beyond reproach unless they
are a saint, and that is questionable given recent inductees from the
current Pope to that lofty designation, or that person is a omnipotent. I
know of no such person in existence. If one does exist, it is not
anyone that has been engaging on any of these lists and would truly
be a rival to the Pope himself.
>
>
> In a group like this, someone like Michael (who makes many valid
> points inbetween the times he is putting and removing his foot from
> his mouth) would be a valuable asset, as would others interested in
> the noncommercial interests.
Pardon me, but as has been noticed by many others both publicly and
privately, YOUR foot seems to be perpetually inserted in your mouth and
your
head perpetually inserted in your posterior orifice. It is no wonder this
being
the case, that you display such "Browned out postulations" on these
lists...
>
>
> If others have an interest in this, I would suggest some nominations.
>
> I have someone in mind, who would be most adept at this, though I
> question whether that person would accept.
I shudder to think of whom that person might be.
>
>
> As you recognize in the above statement, even those with commercial
> interests can see the value of the representation of noncommercial
> interests, so I see no conflict of interest in commercial entities
> discussing this, and would fully support efforts and policies to
> prevent capture by commercial interests.
DIscuss yes, participate as a member, no.
>
>
> --
> William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> General Manager, DSo Internet Services
> Fax:(209) 671-7934
>
> The Law is not your mommy or daddy to go
> crying to every time you have something
> to whimper about.
When people or organizations have a seemingly unresolvable conflict
we have a legal system to assist in resolving those conflicts. It is
commonly
known as "The rule of Law".
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
