On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 00:58:57 -0700, Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 05:32:25AM +0000, William X. Walsh wrote:
>> Bullocks.
>>
>> Just because the ISOC does things also which are non commercial
>> doesn't take away from the fact that most of the advocacy it does in
>> this process is on behalf of COMMERCIAL organizations.
>
>1) In fact, the advocacy it does is on behalf of the 6000 or so
>INDIVIDUAL members who elect the BoT -- not the 200 or so
>organizational members, only some of which are commercial to begin
>with.
Actions speak louder than words, Kent. The ISOC history in this
process has been loud and clear in who and what they are supporting.
>2) ISOC has consistently argued that the top level domain space is a
>public trust -- not exactly a commercial point of view.
>
>3) Using *your* argument -- even if ISOC did advocate a commercial
>point of view, that wouldn't mean that it was a commercial
>organization. It would be perfectly possible for, say, the Red
>Cross to support something that would also benefit commercial
>interests. As *you* said, there is a vast difference between being
>"non-commercial" and being "anti-commercial". You are in fact
>making the same irrational demands on ISOC that you accuse Mr Sondow
>of making in general.
No, not at all, I'm saying that the leadership of this group should
not be one who is anticommercial. I'm not saying everyone who is pro
commercial should be excluded at all, far from it. I'm saying that
organizations such as the ISOC, who is clearly advocating on behalf of
a commercial organization, and the ICIIU, which is really just one
person who is an anti-commercial bigot, should not be involved in the
leadership of such an organization, and should not be permitted to
dominate this constituency.
I never took a stand of exclusion of being a part of the process, just
of being the leadership. Don Heath has shown his propensity for
taking unilateral action without consultation even from the ISOC
board, much less a consensus of the ISOC membership. We should not
have someone with such a track record at the helm of a non-commercial
constituency.
>4) Many, many clearly non-commercial entities have commercial
>corporate sponsors -- the Red Cross, the Sierra Club, the United Way,
>Churches, Libraries, Museums, Symphony Orchestras, Schools -- all
>have commercial corporate sponsors.
And your point is..........
--
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.
