>True - what you say - i just can't figure out who's in charge at
>icann. If I were to do a bit of wild speculation - i'd say
>extraterrestrials are in control.
IBM mostly. They tell Vint what to do. He tells Roberts what to
do. Esther is PR and spin control. The rest of the board tries
not to m
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> >> Twomey noted that if ICANN would continue to develop as a one-sided
> >> industry association, then it might be necessary for governments to
> >> regulate it to protect consumer interests.
> >
> >translation - don't screw up or we'll take you ov
>> Twomey noted that if ICANN would continue to develop as a one-sided
>> industry association, then it might be necessary for governments to
>> regulate it to protect consumer interests.
>
>translation - don't screw up or we'll take you over. in fact this is a
>baseless threat. anyone can run t
At 11:20 PM 7/8/00, Pete Farmer wrote:
>--- Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > GAO Whitewashes ICANN Investigation!
> >
> > www.gao.gov/new.items/og00033r.pdf
> >
> > More comments to follow . . .
>
>
>The GAO's investigation was aimed at the following:
>
>1) Was the formation of ICANN
see notes below
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Hans Klein wrote:
>
>
> REFLECTIONS ON THE ICANN MEETING IN YOKOHAMA
>
>
> ***
> CYBER-FEDERALIST No. 2July 17, 2000
> Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR)
> h
At 09:16 AM 7/15/00, Michael Sondow wrote:
>Craig A. Johnson (CPSR) wrote (to CPTech):
> >
> > Jamie,
> >
> > Hans sent this last night (Japan time). Can you post to your list?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> >
> >
> > PETITION
> > CI
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 13:51:49 -0400 (EDT)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jul 16 13:51:48
