Michael and all,
As has been suggested by several "ICANN'ites", this is what the
ICANN eventually wants to do is migrate to Geneva But hell,
why not Uzbekistan!? ROFLMAO!
Michael Sondow wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
> >
> > Do you have an idea of who is participating in the EC-PoP
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
>
> Do you have an idea of who is participating in the EC-PoP?
The same persons and entities, I assume, who were happy to see the
IAHC run from Geneva.
Michael Sondow I.C.I.I.U. http://www.ici
Michael,
You wrote:
>
> This is what's called solipsistic reasoning, Roberto. The EC POP is
> an integral component of the IAHC, which created ICANN and appointed
> its board.
Do you have an idea of who is participating in the EC-PoP?
Roberto
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
>
> Add also the EC Panel of Participants.
This is what's called solipsistic reasoning, Roberto. The EC POP is
an integral component of the IAHC, which created ICANN and appointed
its board. Obviously, they would support them. Saying that the POP
or the Poised list supp
Greg,
Add also the EC Panel of Participants.
Roberto
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Skinner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 20 July 1999 5:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [IFWP] ICANN's "Internet Community" - Fact and Fan
At 11:38 PM 7/20/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>Sounds then like you are testifying, Mikki? glad to hear
>>thiswhy have they been so quiet about who is to appear?
>
>I'm on the schedule. I may still be bumped.
>
I hope not. It would be interesting if you were bumped and others allowed
to testify.
Mikki Barry a écrit:
>
> >Equally disturbing is why the Commerce Committee has refused to
> >permit anyone to speak at their hearing who has the integrity and
> >courage to say these things in public. The cover-up for ICANN
> >continues.
>
> Gee, thanks
Sorry, I wrote that before I saw that
>Sounds then like you are testifying, Mikki? glad to hear
>thiswhy have they been so quiet about who is to appear?
I'm on the schedule. I may still be bumped.
Sounds then like you are testifying, Mikki? glad to hear
thiswhy have they been so quiet about who is to appear?
> >Equally disturbing is why the Commerce Committee has refused to
> >permit anyone to speak at their hearing who has the integrity and
> >courage to say these things in publ
At 10:55 PM 7/20/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>Equally disturbing is why the Commerce Committee has refused to
>>permit anyone to speak at their hearing who has the integrity and
>>courage to say these things in public. The cover-up for ICANN
>>continues.
>
>Gee, thanks
Uh, yeah, I was gonna say som
>Equally disturbing is why the Commerce Committee has refused to
>permit anyone to speak at their hearing who has the integrity and
>courage to say these things in public. The cover-up for ICANN
>continues.
Gee, thanks
Equally disturbing is why the Commerce Committee has refused to
permit anyone to speak at their hearing who has the integrity and
courage to say these things in public. The cover-up for ICANN
continues.
Karl Auerbach a écrit:
>
> > Also disturbing is this comment from Esther Dyson's letter to B
Greg and all,
Agreed. This has been mainly due to the ICANN's either
gross inability
of their "Outreach" program, or the "Outreach" program is more of
a "Dog and pony show" for the NTIA to give the APPEARANCE
of reaching out to the stakeholder community
Greg Skinner wrote:
"William X. Wals
> Also disturbing is this comment from Esther Dyson's letter to Becky Burr:
>
> This Board personifies effective
> consensus decision-making, and many of its members feel that losing the
> ability to discuss matters in decisional meetings in private will adversely
> affect the candor of those di
>Monday, July 19, 1999, 7:25:21 PM, Patrick Greenwell
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Bill Lovell wrote:
>>> Wow! Sounds like [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there consensus here?
>>> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
>> All kidding aside, Tony raises an extremely valid point: Where is all this
>> "co
Karl Auerbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually if you read the Poised list (I am a former co-chairman of the
> IETF Poised working group) you will find that the IETF support for ICANN
> is not at all clear or unqualified.
I don't think I said anything to the contrary. There are several peo
> I actually meant to include the poised list as an example of a place
> where I have seen a good amount of support for ICANN as well.
Actually if you read the Poised list (I am a former co-chairman of the
IETF Poised working group) you will find that the IETF support for ICANN
is not at all cle
> > As it turns out, ICANN actually has an official
> > "Community Feedback" site that contains an archive of
> > all the "reflections of community consensus." It's the
> > only site, and it's at http://www.icann.org/feedback.html
>
> I wouldn't go so far as to say that ICANN's community feedba
At 08:00 AM 7/20/99 -0700, you wrote:
>I actually meant to include the poised list as an example of a place
>where I have seen a good amount of support for ICANN as well.
>
>--gregbo
How many people is that ?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://kil
I actually meant to include the poised list as an example of a place
where I have seen a good amount of support for ICANN as well.
--gregbo
"William X. Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Come on now Patrick, you know that they mean consensus from the CORE,
> ISOC, and Trademark interests.
Indeed. As others have pointed out, users, small business owners,
independent domain owners (holders), etc. have been left out thus
far.
--greg
"A.M. Rutkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As it turns out, ICANN actually has an official
> "Community Feedback" site that contains an archive of
> all the "reflections of community consensus." It's the
> only site, and it's at http://www.icann.org/feedback.html
I wouldn't go so far as to s
Richard and all,
This one, http://www.icann.org/comments-mail/icann-current/msg00306.html
I thought was the most outrageously funny one I have seen in some time.
ROFLMAO!
However you example from ICANN's own questionable archives,
http://www.icann.org/comments-mail/icann-current/threads.html
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 11:48:45PM -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> At 11:35 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >Richard,
> >
> >All of the TLDA postings, all of the Tom Bliley messages, all of the Esther
> >Dyson messages, all the messages to James Love, all the messages to Rep.
> >Tom Sawyer (my re
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 11:37:22PM -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> At 07:05 PM 7/19/99 -0700, you wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:02:01PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
> >> It is interesting, is it not, that the messages I forwarded to the list
> >> never appeared there.
> >
> >It rejects cross-
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Bill Lovell wrote:
> At 10:02 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
> >>
> >>5. Analysis. ICANN's own "community feedback" files of record
> >>reveal clearly there is no "community consensus." Indeed, it is
> >>preponderantly a chaotic randomness of topics and people combined
Monday, July 19, 1999, 7:25:21 PM, Patrick Greenwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Bill Lovell wrote:
>> Wow! Sounds like [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there consensus here?
>> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
> All kidding aside, Tony raises an extremely valid point: Where is all this
> "consensus"
Richard,
All of the TLDA postings, all of the Tom Bliley messages, all of the Esther
Dyson messages, all the messages to James Love, all the messages to Rep.
Tom Sawyer (my representative), and more. None of them are there.
Gene...
At 11:37 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>At 07:05 PM 7/19/99 -07
At 07:05 PM 7/19/99 -0700, you wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:02:01PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
>> It is interesting, is it not, that the messages I forwarded to the list
>> never appeared there.
>
>It rejects cross-postings.
Since when ?
http://www.icann.org/comments-mail/icann-current/msg00
At 07:25 PM 7/19/99 -0700, you wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Bill Lovell wrote:
>
>> At 10:02 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >>5. Analysis. ICANN's own "community feedback" files of record
>> >>reveal clearly there is no "community consensus." Indeed, it is
>> >>preponderantly a ch
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, William X. Walsh wrote:
> Monday, July 19, 1999, 7:25:21 PM, Patrick Greenwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Bill Lovell wrote:
> >> Wow! Sounds like [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there consensus here?
> >> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
> > All kidding aside, Tony rai
At 11:35 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Richard,
>
>All of the TLDA postings, all of the Tom Bliley messages, all of the Esther
>Dyson messages, all the messages to James Love, all the messages to Rep.
>Tom Sawyer (my representative), and more. None of them are there.
Somboy noticed recently that
At 10:02 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>5. Analysis. ICANN's own "community feedback" files of record
>>reveal clearly there is no "community consensus." Indeed, it is
>>preponderantly a chaotic randomness of topics and people combined
>>with one outspoken critic, and almost none of the mat
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:02:01PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
> It is interesting, is it not, that the messages I forwarded to the list
> never appeared there.
It rejects cross-postings.
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:02:01PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
> It is interesting, is it not, that the messages I forwarded to the list
> never appeared there.
It rejects cross-postings.
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It is interesting, is it not, that the messages I forwarded to the list
never appeared there.
I will repost.
Gene Marsh
At 09:56 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>FANCY
>
>
>In Esther Dyson's reply to Dept of Commerce's Becky Burr
>today, and copied to Commerce Committee Bliley, she used
>the term
It is interesting, is it not, that the messages I forwarded to the list
never appeared there.
I will repost.
Gene Marsh
At 09:56 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>FANCY
>
>
>In Esther Dyson's reply to Dept of Commerce's Becky Burr
>today, and copied to Commerce Committee Bliley, she used
>the term
FANCY
In Esther Dyson's reply to Dept of Commerce's Becky Burr
today, and copied to Commerce Committee Bliley, she used
the term "Internet Community" 10 times to justify various
actions and assertions. Examples include:
"...was adopted following a thorough process of
notice and comment
FANCY
In Esther Dyson's reply to Dept of Commerce's Becky Burr
today, and copied to Commerce Committee Bliley, she used
the term "Internet Community" 10 times to justify various
actions and assertions. Examples include:
"...was adopted following a thorough process of
notice and comment
39 matches
Mail list logo
