Richard and all,
Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> At 07:16 PM 5/28/99 -0700, you wrote:
> >On Sat, May 29, 1999 at 01:03:20AM +0200, Onno Hovers wrote:
> >> > FURTHER RESOLVED, the Board determines that no proposal to create a
> >> > non-commercial domain name holders Constituency has yet been
> >> > submitted that is appropriate for recognition.
> >>
> >> > FURTHER RESOLVED, with the recognition that the interests
> >> > represented by a non-commercial domain name holders Constituency
> >> > should be involved as early as possible in the DNSO organization
> >> > process, the Board urges that the organizers of this Constituency
> >> > should submit a consensus application for provisional recognition
> >> > as soon as possible, so that the issue of recognition can be
> >> > reconsidered by the Board no later than an anticipated meeting
> >> > during the week of June 21 so that representatives of this
> >> > Constituency can join the provisional Names Council.
> >>
> >> Why wasn't a non-commercial domain name holders constituency
> >> recognized? Why didn't the non-commercial domain name holders
> >> reach a consensus?
> >
> >Precisely because Milton Mueller and Michael Sondow insisted on a
> >structure with the two of them in positions of power. There was no
> >other reason; that particular point was the last sticking point.
> >
> >
> >> The current DNSO is now mainly a trade organization.
> >
> >Thank Milton and Michael.
>
> I'm not interested in getting into a pissing contest so I'll state
> my observations once and don't care to discuss it. I was in attendance
> for the NC meeting, as was Esteher and John Klemsin. Ask them if
> my observation is correct.
No need to ask Esther or John, I have now heard form several others
on this list and in private posts as well...
>
>
> Michael Sondow had the first NC propoasl. The ISOC/Heath proopsal
> was second and had 30 ISOC/IAHC friendly organizations as signatories.
This is exactly correct Richard. SOme on this list seem to be confused
in this regard. William (The whiner) Walsh most especially...
>
>
> The Mueller/ACM proposal was supposed to be a compromise.
Correct. And a fairly good one as well.
>
>
> I watched Sondow and Mueller make all sorts of compromises I
> didn't see Heath make any. I talked to him about it and
> was told "my constituents won't accept this". I asked how
> he knew this without asking them or explaining the situation.
Don Heath is always making such broad statements without checking with
the ISOC membership. Kinda tells you what he thinks of the ISOC membership
doesn't it?
>
>
> In the end the dispute was about one paraghraph - how to
> elect the names council memebrs. Heath wanted the 30 orgs
> he signed up to elect them, many other peple pointed out
> one names council member from each of the 3 groups invoilved
> in this seemed reasonable. Heath would not do this, hence
> more than one NC proposal, hence no NC constituencey at
> this time.
Yep, this how I understood it as well. And the ICANN Interim board
went along with it! Unexceptable!!
>
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Remember, amateurs built the Ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
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
