Esther and all,
In this, we completely agree. ICANN should not be involved in the rating or
filtering business. However this makes me amongst others why the
various DNSO mailing lists are involved in filtering of various sorts and
utilizing several methods? Any insight on that Esther? As
FWIW, the first thing I said when I stood up was that I was speaking for
myself and not for ICANN, since ICANN is not and should not be involved in
the rating or filtering business.
Esther Dyson
At 09:30 am 09/10/1999 -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
>
>Since Esther's at the global meeting for est
Gordon Cook wrote:
> I also wonder why, if these issues of why the internet will fail if
> ICANN doesn't have its way have been well thought out and are
> passionately believed in, it's not possible to take an extra hour or
> two and put them into ascii. I had a task to do and stayed up until
>
At 04:09 PM 9/11/99 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Note: A special thanks to Newt Gingrich and
>his staff, for expediting the transcription of
>his recent speech, originally aired on CSPAN on
>September 3rd. Edited excerpts below:
>
>http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/cspan.csp?command=d
[Recipient list reset]
Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Over the last several weeks, I have made extensive
> use of the Internet to expose the extreme bias the
> press has exhibited in their coverage of the ICANN
> fracas. Due to the power of the Internet, these
> efforts have appare
Note: A special thanks to Newt Gingrich and
his staff, for expediting the transcription of
his recent speech, originally aired on CSPAN on
September 3rd. Edited excerpts below:
http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/cspan.csp?command=dschedulemonth=09day=3year=1999
Towards a New
John and all,
Very good points here John, and I for one compleatly agree. >;)
This process should not be a parade of who's who, but rather
of what's what...
John Gaskill wrote:
> Carl Oppendahl wrote in part:
>
> >> At 05:25 AM 9/11/99 , Ken Stubbs wrote:
> >>
> >>this is a "working draft" .
Richard, Ellen and all,
As Ellen indicates, and I think correctly, governments can intervene
at nearly any juncture in any effort of self regulation and influence or
force their will upon the process. The GAC was set up primarily
by the ICANN (Initial?) Interim board to circumvent this possibi
I can't help but chime in that if all the models fail, it may be because the
"political powers" are not really turning the project loose to "all
interested parties" to work out a solution. In each case, the failure is
due to that fact IMHO. Thank you.
Ray Hallman
- Original Message -
F
At 10:30 AM 9/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Ellen Rony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Mr, Farber. There is room here for a different cause/effect analysis. I
>> posit that if ICANN fails, it will be an indicator that the ICANN *model*
>> was not workable, NOT that the Net cannot manage itself. The m
At 11:57 AM 9/11/99 , Cybertelecom wrote:
>Discussion of ICANN is outside of the scope of this listserv.
Hi Bob,
Please approve this posting for CYBERTELECOM-L.
Your comments about ICANN are reminiscent of comments
on the IETF list. It's a "let's bury our head in the
sand" approach.
ICA
Ellen Rony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mr, Farber. There is room here for a different cause/effect analysis. I
> posit that if ICANN fails, it will be an indicator that the ICANN *model*
> was not workable, NOT that the Net cannot manage itself. The model that is
> the source of so much contro
At 07:33 AM 9/11/99 , Ellen Rony wrote:
>Dave Farber wrote:
>>
>> If ICANN fails it
>>will be taken as a indicator that the net can not manage itself and
>>we will get "Adult" supervision which believe me we will not like. We
>>must make it work.
>>
>
>Mr, Farber. There is room here for a differen
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Ken Freed
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 04:16:19 -0400 (EDT)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Sep
- Original Message -
From: Gordon Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 1999 11:37 PM
Subject: Re: [IFWP] please give us substance and not assertions Re:November
Cook Report - intro and part 1 ISOC's critical role in enabling ICANN
> Then give us s
Dave Farber wrote:
>
> If ICANN fails it
>will be taken as a indicator that the net can not manage itself and
>we will get "Adult" supervision which believe me we will not like. We
>must make it work.
>
Mr, Farber. There is room here for a different cause/effect analysis. I
posit that if ICANN f
16 matches
Mail list logo
