Roberto wrote:
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 13:36:58 +0200
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [IFWP] Why fail on purpose?
Tony Rutkowski wrote:
It is plainly preposterous to suggest that you need
big bucks to hold an election. This isn't a presidential
election campaign or the United Nations.
The WTO negotiation process shows just how difficult *serious*
international negotiations can be, but also how successful they can
be. Internet governance has yet to reach the level of
"seriousness" on the international stage which it will. Even I'll
admit that's a good thing ;-).
The
Gene Marsh wrote:
Then where are the elections? All I hear is plenty of excuses. I hav not
even seen any effort to call for potential candidates, let alone any call
for election, or even setting of a tentative date.
Perhaps you aren't looking in the right places. All of the reports and
Joop's site is terrific. It's very clever and easy to navigate. It is a very
nice polling site. I estimate his cost for the three trips at around $4500.
David Johnson has an excellent one also.
Add the fact that it isn't just the votes that have to be authenticated (the use
of a password is
On Sat, 17 Jul 1999, Diane Cabell wrote:
Perhaps you aren't looking in the right places. All of the reports and
recommendations, plus the Board resolutions and timelines are on the ICANN
site. There are steps between here and there. There are very few personnel
available to undertake
At 09:42 AM 7/17/99 -0400, you wrote:
Joop's site is terrific. It's very clever and easy to navigate. It is a very
nice polling site. I estimate his cost for the three trips at around $4500.
David Johnson has an excellent one also.
Add the fact that it isn't just the votes that have to be
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 08:14:55PM +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
Roberto and all,
The IDNO constituency will prove to you and to ICANN that Tony is right.
Voting is now underway for a 21 member steering committee for the IDNO.
OTOH, you railroaded David Crocker, Kevin Connolly, and I out of
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Andy Gardner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 14:13:24 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Amen, bro! A righteous statement. :-)
Patrick Greenwell wrote:
Perhaps if ICANN were to have concentrated most of its efforts on this
task, rather than delving into areas that far exceed its' mandate,we
wouldn't be having this conversation. :-)
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999 at 06:07:02AM +1200, Andy Gardner wrote:
OTOH, you railroaded David Crocker, Kevin Connolly, and I out of the
group, and there is a clear systematic anti-ICANN bias in the IDNO.
ICANN - that's the supposed "open" organisation that is blocking the
recognition of IDNO?
I
Kent Crispin wrote:
I'll offer the same thing for lower cost, on my servers, and I will
throw in some security expertise as well. Sound fair?
How would you feel about serving on an elections implementation committee? I
would also recommend Jim Dixon, Diane Cabell and Joop Teernstra.
At 09:24 AM 7/17/99 -0400, you wrote:
Gene Marsh wrote:
Then where are the elections? All I hear is plenty of excuses. I hav not
even seen any effort to call for potential candidates, let alone any call
for election, or even setting of a tentative date.
Perhaps you aren't looking in the
Joe Sims wrote:
Diane, and I hope you continue; it is helpful. One point I should make: a
very significant hurdle to any election process is the lack of money to run
it. It might well be a sensible strategy, especially at this stage of its
As a late-comer to this debate ... could I have
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 15:59:08 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 03:55:44PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
At 09:24 AM 7/17/99 -0400, you wrote:
My point is only that the elections were to be at the highest level of
priority,
There are clearly other, higher, priorities. The White Paper, the
Green Paper, the MoU with NTIA all quite
On 17 July 1999, Kent Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999 at 06:07:02AM +1200, Andy Gardner wrote:
Stick to your day job.
Security is my day job.
Would this be your day job with a company that was rife with Chinese
spies?
I wouldn't exactly trot that out as support for
At 01:26 PM 7/17/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 03:55:44PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
At 09:24 AM 7/17/99 -0400, you wrote:
My point is only that the elections were to be at the highest level of
priority,
There are clearly other, higher, priorities. The White Paper, the
Green
Karl and all IDNO'ers,
I couldn't agree more with your conclusion here and hence the
subject line I am guessing... At any rate, it is obvious that the ICANN
(Initial?) and Interim Board are not very familiar with devising good
funding models for non-profit enterprises, such ate the NewCo
Diane and all,
Diane Cabell wrote:
Joop's site is terrific. It's very clever and easy to navigate. It is a very
nice polling site. I estimate his cost for the three trips at around $4500.
David Johnson has an excellent one also.
Add the fact that it isn't just the votes that have to be
Kent and all,
IF security is your "Day Job" than this explains allot about why the
LLNL is in such deep hot water with the congress regarding
security issues...
Kent Crispin wrote:
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999 at 06:07:02AM +1200, Andy Gardner wrote:
OTOH, you railroaded David Crocker, Kevin
Jay - where does the supposed quote from me come from? I could have written
it (as edited), and I don't disagree with it, but I don't recall it. And
FWIW there is no such publication (connected with me) as Release 1.2.
At 10:37 AM 16/07/99 -0400, you wrote:
Here's another example of media
At 05:13 PM 7/17/99 , Esther Dyson wrote:
Jay - where does the supposed quote from me come from? I could have written
it (as edited), and I don't disagree with it, but I don't recall it. And
FWIW there is no such publication (connected with me) as Release 1.2.
Hi Esther,
I posted the
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 12:07:29PM -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
[...]
OK. Good. I will be kent1@hotmail -- kent9@hotmail, all
generated by software, all having different passwords, all voting my
way.
Password protection is amazingly naive.
You haven't done your homework.
Saturday, July 17, 1999, 2:39:56 PM, Kent Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joop's statement about passwords was naive, because a fraudulent
voter *with* a password is no better than a fraudulent voter
*without* a password. The primary problem remains, as Diane pointed
out, authenticating
Joop's statement about passwords was naive, because a fraudulent
voter *with* a password is no better than a fraudulent voter
*without* a password. The primary problem remains, as Diane pointed
out, authenticating the voters in the first place.
--
Kent Crispin
At 03:01 PM 7/17/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 04:32:37PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
There are clearly other, higher, priorities. The White Paper, the
Green Paper, the MoU with NTIA all quite clearly state that the
stability of the Internet is the highest priority of all, etc.
At 03:01 PM 7/17/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 04:32:37PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
There are clearly other, higher, priorities. The White Paper, the
Green Paper, the MoU with NTIA all quite clearly state that the
stability of the Internet is the highest priority of all, etc.
What's a bigger problem, fraud ot apathy:
http://www.arin.net/archives/arin-members.9811
"So far we have only received 17 ballots. That's right, of the many, many
members we have in ARIN, only 17 have cast votes. Now c'mon folks, we
have more than 17 nominees!"
Saturday, July 17, 1999, 10:38:42 AM, Kent Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 08:14:55PM +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
Roberto and all,
The IDNO constituency will prove to you and to ICANN that Tony is right.
Voting is now underway for a 21 member steering committee
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 19:24:51 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 19:49:12 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 19:49:13 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Saturday, July 17, 1999, 4:28:55 PM, Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Kent noted, there are some operational aspects to IDNO which should
cause any reasonable evaluator to question its legitimacy as a
representative body for the constituency it claims.
Please, point them out. I
The IDNO constituency will prove to you and to ICANN that Tony is right.
Voting is now underway for a 21 member steering committee for the IDNO.
OTOH, you railroaded David Crocker, Kevin Connolly, and I out of the
group, and there is a clear systematic anti-ICANN bias in the IDNO.
On 17 July 1999, Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 01:33 PM 7/17/99 , Mark C. Langston wrote:
Would this be your day job with a company that was rife with Chinese
spies?
I wouldn't exactly trot that out as support for your abilities, Kent.
Nor, Mark, should you lay claim to any
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Andy Gardner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 20:28:27 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 04:18:34PM -0700, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
[...]
Kent has always believed that a voting system was against his interests
and works to discredit them at every turn and opportunity. There is no
way you can convince him not to, because it really IS against his best
Saturday, July 17, 1999, 7:32:34 PM, Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I always manage to leave something off of lists like these, but here are
the ones that come to mind, some momnths later.
By the list owner:
1. Enforcement of participation rules, post hoc and without documentation
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 22:52:05 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 22:52:05 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
40 matches
Mail list logo
