OK, document an action by the Board that was a lie or was deceptive in some
other way. Because "Fraud must be pled with particularity", be specific as
to how it was a lie or was deceptive (which means it is irrelevant as to
whether you merely disagree with the act itself). We're talking about
whether there is a good faith belief that the Board is dishonest, not a
belief that the Board is incompetent (defining competence as whether the
Board takes acts you would have taken had you been on the Board).
Incidentally, NSI's alleged covert support of anti-ICANN rhetoric from the
beginning of this process (as opposed to "we gave them a fair chance, now
we will to subvert the process") is not a trivial matter that can be
dismissed by the characterization "'communists are hiding in my bathtub'
rhetoric." It speaks as to whether it can be trusted (since trust
seems to be a relevant issue).
At 12:30 PM 6/22/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>That's a hard question to answer. So much of the information about the
>>Board and its actions disseminated on this list or reported in the media
>>has been provided by paid agents of NSI, some of whom did not reveal that
>>relationship when providing or characterizing the information.
>
>And a lot of the information about the board and it actions came directly
>from people NOT paid by NSI who attended meetings and watched them, from
>reporters who are NOT paid by NSI, and from the words of the board members
>themselves on mailing lists (which I would like to encourage more of, since
>that is one definite way to "circumvent" those horrible NSI paid agents,
>shills, and even worse *gasp* employees) and/or their spokespeople.
>
>There is plenty of information from which to make an informed decision, and
>most of us have enough brain cells to sift through propaganda (perceived or
>"real") disseminated by any party. I'm personally getting very tired of
>this being set up as a bipartisan system. The issues are FAR more complex
>than "who gets .com." Could we maybe focus on the issues rather than the
>"communists are hiding in my bathtub" rhetoric?
>
>And no, I am not paid by NSI or ICANN or Berkman Center or IBM or AOL or
>PSI or the evil Karl or Joe Sims ad nauseum although to promote full
>disclosure, I must admit that NSI bought me a drink or two during the
>infamous IFWP meetings. I feel they were for medicinal purposes only.
>
>
