Esther wrote:
>>It is not governing
> >the world, and god forbid *anything* should be put to a global vote.
Esther,
I do not want to read or understand this statement out of context, as I
think I understand what you were thinking of when you wrote that (world
government is abhorrent, whether
Esther wrote:
>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 12:19:34 -0500
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Esther Dyson)
>Subject: Re: [IFWP] Esther Dyson's reply
>
>In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
>people worldwide, yes, but only of interested
Mark Langston wrote:
>
>Are you planning on implementing literacy tests and poll taxes to ensure
>only those who are interested and informed vote? The USA has been through
>this particular aspect of democracy before, Esther. Jim Crow laws were
>declared unconstitutional years ago.
>
>Or perhaps
Joop, it's not fair to quote out of context. I appreciate your arguments, but
this was originally in response to a thread concerning the WTO and ICANN's
engagement with that organization. Esther Dyson was commenting on the mess the
WTO is, I think, not making statements concerning theoretical glob
In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
voting about. yes, I know, who decides? maybe we should have a global vote
on that! (just kidding!) it should organize bottom-up, Better yet where
On 30 November 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Esther Dyson) wrote:
>In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
>people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
>voting about.
Until ICANN constructs, enforces, and abides by a coherent, self-
Esther - don't bother writing - just think red latex.
On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Esther Dyson wrote:
> In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
> voting about. yes, I know, who decides? mayb
On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Esther Dyson wrote:
> In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
> voting about. yes, I know, who decides? maybe we should have a global vote
> on that! (just kidding
Esther "Mistake" Dyson wrote:
>Better yet where
>possible are global markets, where people get to choose for themselves
>without imposing their choices on>others.
Ever heard of practicing what you preach, your Ladyship?
Michael Sondow
Esther Darling:
When you speak of democracy you should focus on reality. For now my
recommendation is red latex.
Regards
Joe baptista
On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Esther Dyson wrote:
> In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> people worldwide, yes, but only of intere
Esther and all,
Argument in a circle here Esther. Nice try though, but no cigar. >;)
Esther Dyson wrote:
> In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
> voting about. yes, I know, wh
> In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
> voting about.
Interesting comment when one considers that one of the rumored selection
criteria for the original board was they they were ou
Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> > people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
> > voting about.
>
> ...As for ICANN's metric of "interested". It appears to be a metric based on
> the extraction
Eric and all,
Eric Weisberg wrote:
> Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > > In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> > > people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
> > > voting about.
> >
> > ...As for ICANN's metric of "interested". It
On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Esther Dyson wrote:
> In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
> people worldwide, yes, but only of interested parties who know what they are
> voting about.
Hilarious. Exactly how does this get us to the ICANN board?
The original particip
My God, is this person for real What on God's green Earth is she
talking about?
Oh, the poor Internet . . . . . . with Esther in charge.
Makes me sick.
At 12:19 PM -0500 11/30/99, Esther Dyson wrote:
>In practical terms, I don't think a "global" vote makes sense. A vote of
>people worldw
Like I keep saying - when you think of Ester - just think red latex, and
maybe a big dildo to wrap it all up. Ester does not equal reality.
On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Frank Rizzo wrote:
> My God, is this person for real What on God's green Earth is she
> talking about?
>
> Oh, the poor Internet
Frank and all,
Your response here Frank gave me a great idea. I was thinking about
marketing some Esther/Mike/ICANN barf bags with the ICANN
Boards picture on the outside and in the bottom of the inside of
the bag, and selling them on the internet. Any idea for a good
Domain name that would be
18 matches
Mail list logo
