I think the notion of any worldwide body regulating spam or porn or content,
which should be regulated within commmunities, is scary. These are not
issues that need to be decided on a worldwide basis.
Esther
At 03:46 AM 12/04/99 -0400, Jay Fenello wrote:
FYI:
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999
I would agree here. I for one do not think ICANN should be
creating policy on content, be it SPAM, port or anything else.
that is something that should be left up to each country.
I would also state that as an ISP, I do not want to be Net.Police.
Esther, I hope you will keep this from being
Michael and all,
Michael, William is confused. Nothing unusual there. It is likely that he
forgot to take his medication again...
Michael Sondow wrote:
William X. Walsh a écrit:
Michael, your lack of understanding how the law operates never ceases
to amaze me.
Anyone suing will
Esther, Jay and all,
As has been noted by literly scores of stakeholders to date, and are a matter
of record in your own ICANN archives, many are of the opinion that the
ICANN Interim Board, yes that includes YOU Esther, are acting in a
quite concerning manner, most especially in respect to
Surely it is the economic liberalism fostered by internet trade in
commerce, ideas and content that means that either the question has
to be answered by global regulation or by some 'unseen hand'. There
was a test conference on racism on the internet sponsored by UNHCHR
in mid-1997 at which
Governance can be viewed as an efficient mechanism for problem solving. If
spam is a problem for so many parties that a combined effort avoids
duplication and makes the solution less expensive, then a "governance" or
"self-governance" mechanism is likely to arise. Whether it will be
world-wide
Tamar and all,
It is surely clear that Governance can be a problem solving
mechanism, however as history has shown us, and is especially
true in the Internet media, Governance is not efficient as this
process itself has shown. None the less some form of
inclusive Governance is needed for the
Esther is of course absolutely right. But Esther is ICANN has no wish to
extend the bounds of its authority outside of the IANA duties why are we
seeing the ICANN by laws written by sims in such a fashion as to allow the
bnoard to establish new supporting organizations?
I think the notion of
At 04:35 AM 4/13/99 , Esther Dyson wrote:
I think the notion of any worldwide body regulating spam or porn or content,
which should be regulated within commmunities, is scary. These are not
issues that need to be decided on a worldwide basis.
I agree. But why should domain names be any
At 06:35 AM 4/13/99 , Esther Dyson wrote:
I think the notion of any worldwide body regulating spam or porn or content,
which should be regulated within commmunities, is scary. These are not
issues that need to be decided on a worldwide basis.
Hi Esther,
The U.S. Government doesn't *need* to
William W. wrote,
Intermail.Net and Majik.Net arrived at a settlement.
Details pending at http://www.intermail.net/
"Received a call from Dale at Majik Net this afternoon, and had a
rather friendly talk with him. Much better dealing directly with him
rather then through the attorney.
Tamar,
The Internet is like a market because there is no control over
membership or use. These are guided by hte invisible hand. But
markets must have a structure, such as standardization. The Internet
also must have a structure. The structure requires some
governance--central authority
Jay wrote:
For the most part, I agree with Tamar:
"The Internet also must have a structure. The structure
requires some governance--central authority to establish
the rules of the game. The important decision is where to
draw the line, and avoid standards that are not necessary
for
All,
FYI, NSOL continues it march upwards! 116 7/16 +1
5/16.
Got to luv it! >;)
Interesting additional news as well See:
http://www.dljdirect.com/cgi/inet/qndigest.trn?research_cde=REUkey_nmb=N12405301trn_key_nmb=RTR990412002960symbol=NSOLselection=all_news_sources
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A.
I agree that regulating content (censorship) isn't the job of
ICANN or the more openly democratic bodies that (I hope)
will emerge down the road. As for spam, however, I would
support a global ban on all email with false or misleading
addresses, plus a global rule for fast removal on-demand
from
Mikki Barry wrote:
Constituencies need to
be inclusive rather than exclusive. Individuals AND organizations need to
have voices and votes. If ICANN is going to be a coherrent and harmonious
structure, there has to be more enfranchisement of dissenting opinions,
true incorporation of those
On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Ellen Rony wrote:
My prediction is that the constituencies will not be inclusive (e.g.,
individuals denied in one case, non IP interests in another)
My prediction is that this bloated, byzantine "seperate constituency for
everything and everyone under the sun" model will
Here's the Ziff-Davis take on the new DN registrars,
in the event anyone has not seen this.
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2240608,00.html
Bill Lovell
Mikki Barry wrote:
Constituencies need to
be inclusive rather than exclusive. Individuals AND organizations need to
have voices and votes. If ICANN is going to be a coherrent and harmonious
structure, there has to be more enfranchisement of dissenting opinions,
true incorporation of those
Joop Teernstra a écrit:
At 19:20 12/04/99 -0400, Michael Sondow wrote:
And if business
takes over the non-commercial constituency, as it seems the board or
Sims or someone wants to help facilitate by favoring ISOC the Janus,
Have you heard anything new? What is happening there?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Patrick Greenwell
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 1999 9:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: Internet Governance?!
On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Ellen Rony wrote:
My prediction is that the
Esther-
Can you tell us what the Internet Policy Institute is, and what its
relationship with ICANN might be?
As everyone well knows I consider the constituency mechanism to be total
insanity - a form of first-class Gerrymandering, and a vehicle for abuse.
I've heard that there are other constituencies forming besides those
initially put forth.
These include:
- The small business constituency. I've
Bill and all,
Bill, thank you for passing this on. Very interesting indeed. If you
look
in the "Talk Back" area under this article you find some interesting
replies. One that struck me is the following:
http://www.zdnet.com/talkback/22_36022_151972.html
Bill Lovell wrote:
Here's the
James and all,
Than on the other hand
http://www.zdnet.com/talkback/22_36022_151972.html
James Santagata wrote:
Analysts Rip Network Solutions
3:00 a.m. When Network Solutions shut down Aberdeen Group's Web site, it
stepped on the wrong toes. The market-research firm publishes a
Esther and all,
Dam I am sorry Esther, you just didn't make it!
See:http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2240979,00.html
Maybe a new Broom would help? ;)
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group.
You mean to tell me, there's a person who speaks clearly and
concisely, who hasnt succumbed to quackery and politicking, who
knows the problems -- and comes through with fair answers?
She gets my vote for the Board, regardless of the constituencies.
kerry
==
The discussion of the constituencies is important, but we shouldn't
forget about the General Assembly. It was the feature of the DNSO that
many of us thought most important, and the draft bylaws still give that
body the real "power" in the DNSO.
It is clear that organizational interests are
At 06:49 PM 4/13/99 -0400, interesting_people wrote:
From: "Tim Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Dave Farber" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FYI, CNN's take on the IPI
Latest Internet Policy Group Sprouts In Washington
April 12, 1999: 4:52 p.m. ET
By Robert MacMillan, Newsbytes
Karl Auerbach a écrit:
As everyone well knows I consider the constituency mechanism to be total
insanity - a form of first-class Gerrymandering, and a vehicle for abuse.
I've heard that there are other constituencies forming besides those
initially put forth.
Further suggestions:
Dave and all,
Yep, looks like Esther is gad flying again or playing the CYA game
to the extreme.
The divisiveness continues
Dave Farber wrote:
At 06:49 PM 4/13/99 -0400, interesting_people wrote:
From: "Tim Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Dave Farber" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FYI,
Bah Humbug. Another group of self perpetuating beltway insider elites.
Here the reaction of someone I know well.
Pretty egotistical group, I would say! Self perpetuating board which
ponders all these sweeping subjects, never 'lobbies' but influences
policies by 'educating' policy makers with
At 08:18 PM 4/13/99 -0400, you wrote:
Bah Humbug. Another group of self perpetuating beltway insider elites.
Yes. But where's Hillary?
Bill Lovell
Dave Farber a écrit:
At 06:49 PM 4/13/99 -0400, interesting_people wrote:
From: "Tim Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Dave Farber" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FYI, CNN's take on the IPI
Are you going to sit around eating salmon, drinking Chablis, and
jawing about the Internet with these folk, Mr.
Gordon Cook a écrit:
The perpetraitors.
Working Group
for
The Internet Policy Institute
April 1999\
Kimberly Jenkins, Chairman, Highway 1
While I have to commend you for the coining of a clever new word
("perpetraitors"), I must reprove you for diminishing Ms. Jenkins
stature by
35 matches
Mail list logo
