Kent Crispin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:58:58PM -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
> > Monday, July 19, 1999, 10:31:38 PM, Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
>
> - snip -
> >
> >> No, I don't agree to that offensive loyalty oath. I simply ignored it.
> >
> > So you do not support the principles of an Individuals Constituency in
> > the DNSO?
>
> You *just* said, above
>
> > ...we don't consider the position they are likely to take
> > with regard to their plans as a factor in membership decisions.
>
> And here you are considering it, aren't you?
>
> Your questions about what I support and don't support are irrelevant
> and offensive.
>
> > Then you must of made a mistake in asking for membership in a group
> > you don't think should exist.
> >
> > It is reasonable (and indeed approved by our membership) that members
> > should support the concept of an Individuals Constituency in the DNSO.
>
> Nope. It's not. No other constituency has such a requirement for
> membership.
As far as I know, Kent is essentially correct here...
>
>
> > > As anybody can see, this is the first move in a PAB takeover of the
> > > IDNO. ;-)
> >
> > No, I don't see it that way at all. If you had not made the one
> > statement above about not supporting the concepts of an IDNO within
> > the DNSO, and provided you are not a voting member, or control a
> > voting member of another constituency (per our rules) then I'd say
> > there was no question about your membership. These are the EXACT same
> > rules all members are required to meet. The same way the NCDNHC is
> > making rules about who can and cannot be a member, and the same way
> > the ISP constituency set standards defining the qualifications of an
> > ISP to join.
>
> None of them have loyalty oaths.
Again Kent makes a very good point here and one that the
IDNO may want to give a bit more consideration to. If you as an
organization, whether a ICANN recognized constituency or not,
having them sign or agree to in any fashion to any set of principals
that are hard and fast, or otherwise unchanging in folly and would tend
to be disadvantageous to the IDNO....
>
>
> > This is totally in line with the ICANN dictates over constituency self
> > organization.
>
> I don't think so.
>
> > > I didn't expect any better of you...
> >
> > Expect what? That we make an exception to our standing rules, applied
> > in a consistent and fair, and open, manner just because you have some
> > "celebrity" effect in that your request for membership is being made
> > so public?
> >
> > I would think that our applying the same standards no matter what
> > shows that the IDNO has the consistency and strength.
>
> Sort of like the KKK.
>
> > The "weak"
> > thing to do would be to approve your membership simply because denying
> > it might create controversy.
>
> Go for it.
>
> --
> Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
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
