(http://www.eff.org/Cases/Heathmount_v_Technodome.com/20011205_eff_pr.html
).
Eff recently decided to file a brief in the CNNews.com case, where part of
the case involves a dispute over who has personal jurisdiction.
Apparently ICANN has become involved in the case to tell an ICANN regulated
It would seem to us to be fairly simple to allow every .org domain holder to
vote to express preferences with regard to who should get the .org bid.
Unlike the at large election, there is a known list of potential voters, and
also a ready and inexpensive way to contact them and to verify who
Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election?
If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy
enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the
Internet.
See http://mysafevote.com/
Perhaps IFWPlist would like to give it a try for IFWP
Morfin; Joanna Lane; karl@cavebear. com; Simon Higgs;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org
reassignment
Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election?
If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy
enough
At 11:45 AM 3/22/02 -0800, Einar Stefferud wrote:
Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election?
If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy
enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the
Internet.
You don't even need that. If every
- Original Message -
From: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election?
If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy
enough to issue
- Original Message -
From: Richard J. Sexton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy
enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the
Internet.
You don't even need that. If every owned of an .org domain were to
: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election?
If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy
enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let
- Original Message -
From: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I do not propose to run an election for ICANN
board seats without ICANN's knowledge.
Stef,
I was under the impression that .ORG people wanted to vote on what
company they wanted to run the IPv4 32-bit DNS .ORG Registry
Imagine ICANN controlling the numbering space.
Well, let me think. Over the last decade or so of my life, I have had
probably five different phone numbers which were assigned to me by a variety
of entities. I've never really cared who assigned them or what the numbers
were, and have a hard
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, at 13:05 [=GMT-0500], John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote:
Imagine ICANN controlling the numbering space.
Well, let me think. Over the last decade or so of my life, I have had
probably five different phone numbers which were assigned to me by a variety
of entities. I've
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, at 18:49 [=GMT-0500], Joanna Lane wrote:
And this does what exactly?
www.enum.org
Because ENUM puts telephone numbers into the DNS, it
allows for a wide
range
of applications based solely on a phone number. Probably
the most exciting
application is an
At 08:39 PM 3/16/02 -0600, you wrote:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/199504/msg2.html
This part looks interesting:
12:00-13:30--Lunch
--
With foxes we must play the fox. - unknown
/\ / http://www.vrx.net
\ / ASCII
Jay Fenello wrote:
What we have is a systemic problem, one that
can be described by field theory To fix it,
we'll need a comprehensive approach
I agree with Jay, and I think we must view the USG's approach to ICANN
in the light of the USG's approach in general to international politics,
When pray tell did the Govt pay for my piece of the Internet.
I do not recall ever getting any funds from them to pay for it.
I sure would appreciate getting back my $70,000 spent on Internet
stuff over the years. Somehow I expect you are not counting anything
spent by non-govt people to
At 2/28/02 02:47 AM, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
The problem, Jay as I see it, is this: can ICANN be reformed? I don't
think so - not with the people that are in charge of it now. Why are
they there then? Ira/the DoC appointed them. Why the DoC?
Because in the Inter-agency Domain Name Task force
There goes Internet democracy
At 2/25/02 12:08 PM, Chris Chiu wrote:
During a private retreat, the President of the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers, M Stuart Lynn, proposed vast changes to ICANN's
governing structure These plans call for the abolition of ICANN public
At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote:
Note: There was never a public vote to privatise the Internet,
which is (was) public property.
No, it's not. It's a set of interconnected *private* networks.
Tony Rutkowski went to a lot of effort to make sure the Internet
was, in a formal telecommunications
Did not the funds originally come from the government
Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property?
I have great respect for Tony, but construing the net as
private has caused more harm than good, i.e., ICANN.
-- ken
At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote:
Note: There was never a
The Internet started in the military for decentralized communication,
then expanded to universities with government research contracts,
then expanded to state-sponsored universities, then private colleges
universities, then the general public. I stand by my first statement.
The net always was
At 02:26 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote:
The Internet started in the military for decentralized communication,
then expanded to universities with government research contracts,
then expanded to state-sponsored universities, then private colleges
universities, then the general public. I stand by my
Freed
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 4:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public
elections
Did not the funds originally come from the government
Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property?
I have great respect for Tony
groups that own that resource, in this case the US people. So if the ccTLDs
are treated as public resources under the control of national governments,
They aren't. rfc1591 waa skillfully worded to prevent that.
that part certainly cannot be said to be an interconnected private network.
Who
Am I mistaken, or did the DoC's White Paper call for management of the
domain name system by the private sector?
And what was that ICANN Article of Incorporation about lessening the
burdens of government?
Jay Fenello wrote:
At 2/25/02 12:08 PM, Chris Chiu wrote:
During a private retreat,
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, at 16:37 [=GMT-0500], Joanna Lane wrote:
Define Internet They had to drop URDP and Sunrise from the dotUS proposal
(or in the alternative, could have applied to Congress for a variance)
because access to a public resource cannot discriminate against any of the
groups that
]
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public
elections
Did not the funds originally come from the government
Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property?
I have great respect for Tony, but construing the net as
private has caused more harm than good
Joanna Lane wrote:
They had to drop URDP and Sunrise from the dotUS proposal
(or in the alternative, could have applied to Congress for a variance)
because access to a public resource cannot discriminate against
any of the
groups that own that resource, in this case the US people
And outside of the USA, Internet development mostly was funded by governments.
The U.S department of commerce had no right to make unilateral choices for
them.
The best way to get public accountability is to assert the Internet is a
public utility,
the same as the airwaves, subject to the will of
At 04:19 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote:
And outside of the USA, Internet development mostly was funded by governments.
An interesting assertion. Can you back it up?
First of all there really wasn't that much Internet development
to speak of. In fact it didn't exists. Perhaps you're thinking
of the
Examples are any nation on earth where the government owns the phone
company, India for example. I'm more of a free marketeer than a socialist,
to be sure, but by natural law, if the people rightfully own the government
that constructs the network of interconnected networks, like a city builds
At 11:06 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote:
Examples are any nation on earth where the government owns the phone
company, India for example. I'm more of a free marketeer than a socialist,
to be sure, but by natural law, if the people rightfully own the government
that constructs the network of
At 2/26/02 06:25 PM, Jim Fleming wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is this?
Stef,
I believe we agree that the ICANN Monster is out of control.
In my opinion, it is important to document where the ICANN Monster
came from. People do not seem to
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Paul Garrin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Richard J. Sexton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ...
Content-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:17:18 -0500
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well, that certainly seems to have woken everyone up.
I had speculated that the notice was updated after an outcry, but I made the mistake
of giving ICANN the benefit of the doubt. The more fool me.
As to the icann.org/www.icann.org thing, it's trivial to default DNS lookups, and
obnoxious
I can imagine a new.net handout that would be political, not commercial.
Give it a try. According to ICANN, it's free.
Patrick Greenwell wrote:
The fact is that ICANN has turned down at least one potential sponsor
New.net, which would completely remove their ability to share their
perspective
A short trip to ICANN's website clears it up.
http://www.icann.org/mdr2001/
Under Sponsorship Opportunities, they ememphasize/em the words commercial
materials in their request for a $5k fee. Political materials would certainly be
permissible.
Fact is better than rumor when propagandizing,
The web site was recently changed. It didn't say that originally.
Cf. http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=450
On 10 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A short trip to ICANN's website clears it up.
http://www.icann.org/mdr2001/
Under Sponsorship Opportunities, they ememphasize/em
I see that nothing has changed on the ICANN/IANA
front.
In many ways, it is a reflection of what's wrong
in the world today. In a recent radio interview,
I talk with John Bunzl about his views on this
destructive competition.
If anyone's interested, you can hear it
at:
At 10/18/01 12:56 PM, John L Crain wrote:
Firstly let me apologies to those on the Cc: list. Unless I hear directly
that you are interested in this discussion I will not include you in any
future correspondence. Also my apologies if by my replying this got past
your .procmail. Long Cc lists
--
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:49:12 -0400
From: Jay Fenello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision
Since when has this been the Marxist wing-nut list?
--Blair
ICANN SUX!
-ob. ifwp
At 9/18/01 12:54 AM, Blair P. Houghton wrote:
--
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:49:12 -0400
From: Jay Fenello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision
Since when has this been the Marxist wing-nut list
FYI:
At 9/13/01 11:12 PM, Barry Carter wrote:
Below is an email that I am sending out to various people that are not aware
of Infinite Wealth:
Sept 11, was predictable and was predicted in the online book Infinite
Wealth http://www.winwinworld.net/book (chapters 8 and 9). As we transition
Hello Jay,
I am very interested in your response, in particular this:-
And when you say ...
I call upon the mainstream media to investigate and substantiate
allegations of deceptive practices and corruption that flow forth in
abundance from those monitoring proceedings from within the ICANN
Hi Joanna --
For historical snapshots of ICANN and its precedessor, gTLD-MoU,
please visit, http://www.media-visions.com/icann.htm and my earlier
writings, http://www.media-visions.com/netdemocracy.html. We need
to know where we've been to understand where we are now or where
we may be going
At 9/10/01 09:52 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:
Hello Einar,
The funny thing about this medium is that while I have no idea who you are,
you feel entitled to ask me all kinds of questions without introducing
yourself. If this were the phone, I doubt I'd take your call...;-)
Hi Joanna,
You can read
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:16:52 +0200 (CEST)
From: Marc Schneiders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: William X Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ga] History (IFWP.ORG)
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, at 17:48 [=GMT-0700], William X Walsh wrote:
Friday, Friday, September 07, 2001, 5:04:12 PM,
it's up :) nothing ever here tho
That's www.youcann.org, not "yourcann"
At 12:24 PM 11/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:43:14 -0500
From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "Carskadden, Rush" [EMAIL PROTECTED],
"'[EMAIL
I agree with Judith on this. Seeing the entire internet - instead of the
ICANN restricted internet is as simple as point click and reboot.
Further data is available at www.youcann.org and instructions are located
here http://www.youcann.org/instructions.html and include a link to a
Joe Baptista wrote:
point, click, reboot - and astalavista ICANN.
Lo siento, Joe, pero "hasta la vista" no basta. Hace falta que ICANN
desaparece.
M.S.
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Michael Sondow wrote:
Joe Baptista wrote:
point, click, reboot - and astalavista ICANN.
Lo siento, Joe, pero "hasta la vista" no basta. Hace falta que ICANN
desaparece.
Estoy en el acuerdo con usted. Pienso que estamos viendo el fin da
fiesta de ICANN.
regards
I've had more productive, friendly and constructive exchanges with Vint in the
last two days than I had in two years of trying to talk to Esther. Perhaps I'm
being co-opted but I sense a new era of a willingness to cooperate here. I am
encouraged.
--
http://www.hungersite.org/cgi-bin/donate.pl
At 03:00 PM 11/6/00 +, Jim Dixon wrote:
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Dave Crocker wrote:
Whatever can be done to provide diversity and resilience in the
management of the Internet should be done. Keeping .EU clear from
ICANN's entanglements was a small but real step in this direction.
How does
Did I read the draft too quickly? I cannot see any increased serving
of TM interests in the paper. Would you care to be more specific? Is
it that ccTLD's that operate as an alternative gTLD are required to
accept UDRP? Well, most if not all that qualify here, have already
done so voluntarily.
--
confusion .. ?
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:25:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Frederick Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Reply: The "idea" of the absolute "power" of ICANN is a myth.
Fred - the internet if simple enough - if
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
Hello Joe,
Monday, November 13, 2000, 12:58:51 AM, you wrote:
more pleadings for an audience ..
Hmm, as much as I detest Joe's methods, I have to say that I received
several email from Mr Harris as well, asking to talk to me via phone
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi! This email is an update on the ICANN meetings next week in Marina
del Rey, California. The meetings are free to attend, and open to any
interested person. We encourage broad participation in our bottom-up
consensus-development process -- you can participate
I think I know why. This is an ancient list. Toru and Eric Jensen are on
it too. They don't have those email addresses any more. Some one got
this from an ancient distribution list. Who knows where.
Congrats .. looks like your on the list. Now my question is why is
that??
well, I'll be damned. beatsa hell outta me!
of course, Esther has been a Loyal EGR Irregular in Good Standing
from Jump Street. maybe she stuck me on there. or John Patrick
at IBM, whom I used to work with in that
Hi:
The information in your article is incorrect regarding registrar.com. As
of yesturday there were 3,072 multilingual domains registered using the
RACE encoding method i.e. bq-- as a prefix. Of these only 466 were
registered by register.com. Not thousands. At best INNERWISE is the
leader
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Dave Crocker wrote:
Whatever can be done to provide diversity and resilience in the
management of the Internet should be done. Keeping .EU clear from
ICANN's entanglements was a small but real step in this direction.
How does another ccTLD in any way "provide
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#Last year alternate roots supported 0.3% of internet traffic.
#
#This year alternate roots are supporting 5.5% of internet traffic.
#
#The BIND study this year to date has ennumerated 60,513 dns (15% of
#399,937 dns) of
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, jim bell wrote:
Nevertheless, what has happened here demonstrates a basic flaw at the
heart of the domain name system. ICANN and many essential Internet
resources remain subject to US jurisdiction. ICANN itself is just a
California corporation, so it is subject to
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
Hello Ron,
Sunday, November 05, 2000, 5:28:03 PM, you wrote:
At 06:34 PM 11/5/00 -0500, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Last year alternate roots supported 0.3% of internet traffic.
This year alternate roots are supporting 5.5% of internet
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
That is not what you said in the original post, this is:
Last year alternate roots supported 0.3% of internet traffic.
This year alternate roots are supporting 5.5% of internet traffic.
You have no basis for saying how much traffic the
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
I understand. In fact the estimate is correct. Unfortuantely I don't
have the time to teach you statistical analysis. But we can be confident
that 5% of internet traffic is non USG. My results are representative and
can be extrapolated
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Dave Crocker wrote:
At 11:31 PM 11/3/00 +, Jim Dixon wrote:
Given the now-crucial role
that the Internet plays in the global economy, ICANN's hegemony
gives, for example, representatives of small towns in California sitting
on the right committee in Sacramento
At 10:31 AM 11/3/00, Jim Dixon wrote:
Nevertheless, what has happened here demonstrates a basic flaw at the
heart of the domain name system. ICANN and many essential Internet
resources remain subject to US jurisdiction. ICANN itself is just a
California corporation, so it is subject to the
our ol friend Ken is up to no good again.
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Tom Vogt wrote:
it seems that core (i.e. the root servers) has deleted the entry for
vote-auction.com - while the whois still works and their primary
nameserver (in austria) still resolves, a regular lookup returns with
"host
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
our ol friend Ken is up to no good again.
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Tom Vogt wrote:
it seems that core (i.e. the root servers) has deleted the entry for
vote-auction.com - while the whois still works and their primary
nameserver (in austria)
Roeland Meyer wrote:
Those who are having problems with ICANN UDRP and other ICANN interventions
may look towards California State intervention mechanisms. ICANN is
violating quite a number of those regulations. The problem is that one must
be a California resident citizen in order to
Good news - i-dns is almost fixed. Now all they have to do is recognize
themselves for their own cctlds and their fixed. To be frank cctld .LA
was only established this past week - so everyone was caught on that one.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote:
i-DNS.net International
Root
Hey Joe,
You could try consolidating the reports into a single e-mail, like Tony
Bates does with the CIDR report (call it the ROOT report) and include NANOG.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Baptista [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 6:12 PM
To: James Seng
Cc:
good idea - i'll incorporate it into the facility next month.
regards
joe
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
Hey Joe,
You could try consolidating the reports into a single e-mail, like Tony
Bates does with the CIDR report (call it the ROOT report) and include NANOG.
Hi Michael,
I've recently come to realize that our legal
system is either broken, or it just can't keep
up with the changes in our society.
In ICANN, we have the world's first, global
governance body, established by a world-wide
process conducted by the U.S. Department of
Commerce.
Hey John - is this guy refering to you? It's a funny sort of compliment.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:41:55 -0500
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson
At 05:06 PM 10/29/00
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
Sunday, October 29, 2000, 2:14:03 PM, you wrote:
This is great - Vixie has immortalized me ;-)
http://mail-abuse.org/lawsuit/baptista.htm
I see your threat of a lawsuit was as empty as they claimed it would
be.
in law william nothing
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
Hello Joe,
Sunday, October 29, 2000, 4:40:15 PM, you wrote:
institution. At least one things for sure - i have managed to get a bug
up vixies ass, and that's worth a giggle or two.
Not really. They post messages from anyone who sends in
This is a public distribution and I'm not complaining. From now on
everyone get's checked and everone has an opportunity to fix themselves.
I'm sick and tired of root server operations outside the legacy being run
like some candy consession. If ya can't stand the heat baby get out of
the
Our friends at i-dns should really fix their roots - soon.
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote:
i-DNS.net International Root Sync report: Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000
http://www.i-DNS.net/
AL - ERROR detected in zone .AL
ERROR root missing ns ITGBOX.IAT.CNR.IT.
ERROR delete
Our friends at namespace should really fix their root soon. Not only is
the soa wrong - but alot of errors in the zones.
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote:
Name.Space Root Sync report: Sat Oct 28 22:28:41 EDT 2000
http://www.namespace.org/
AT - ERROR detected in zone .AT
I missed this. Can you or anyone please forward to me the spam Ester sent
you. I know the old crow and i'm sure there are some people on domain
policy who would love to read her spam.
regards
joe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
At 6:47 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote:
Yes Ben - it's ICANN fiesta time - one more time. But this meeting will
not be boring. We at pccf will be doing very little this time round. But
we are looking forward to watching the show. And I can gurantee that this
will be a good show. It will be boring with moments of entertainment.
I
Oh no - Ben - you poor kid. I'm sorry about that. I have so many email
aliases, I ended up cutting and pasting the wrong one in - yours.
I'm sorry about that. It's a good thing I identified myself as always.
see ya ther
--
J. Baptista Planet Communications Computing
Thanks to Jim Fleming for posting the URL and text.
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/usrfc2/comments.html
"The proposed plan would auction new generic second-level domain names under
.us (.e.g. business.us, loans.us), the proceeds from which would fund a
"Digital Opportunity
We have seen this too, and have been warned about it. Is this a
violation of an ICANN registration rules? Jamie
Jay Fenello wrote:
Infoworld is researching multiple reports
from people who have checked on domain names
that were available, only to find later that
they were registered
Hi Jamie,
The reporter asked me the same thing.
Even if it is not illegal, it certainly
seems unethical. I suspect it is counter
to the registrar agreement as well, but
we have seen registrars "work" with other
domain name warehousers in the past.
In other words, it would be
Kent Crispin ?
In a message dated 10/9/2000 9:05:43 AM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If at that point one candidate has an
absolute majority (50% + 1) of the vote, he/she is selected. If not,
the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. The eliminated
candidate's
Joe,
Thanks for keeping an ear to the political ground for us and alerting us
to the sad state of affairs that have characterized this administration in the
US, though the affairs are usually less political in nature. I encourage all
US readers of Joe's post to ask their representatives (now
Anupam Chander writes:
First, Mr.
Sondow's uneducated claim that I have "only recently become aware of ICANN's
activities" is utterly false.
I used the word "uneducated" in reference to the ICANN Board, not
Mr. Chander. As to Mr. Chander being only recently involved in this
affair, I don't
Kent Crispin wrote:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 11:13:25AM -0700, Anupam Chander wrote:
[...]
Mr. Sondow's future postings will go unanswered by me.
That is because he has no answer to them.
Generally, that is the best policy.
Same for Crispin, whose credibility (never very great, since he
Anupam Chander writes:
While I appreciate Mr. Sondow's concern, this seems to me a premature
assessment.
It seems to premature to Mr. Chander because you he has only
recently become aware of ICANN's activities. If he had been
following its development for the past two years, as I have, he
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 11:13:25AM -0700, Anupam Chander wrote:
[...]
Mr. Sondow's future postings will go unanswered by me.
Generally, that is the best policy.
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark
Chance observations from a series of disinterested observers on ICANN's 44
applications.
1. Frightening the paucity of diversity, multilingualism or imagination.
2. Seems like gtld-mou replicants only make the list?
3. None of these people even played junior scrabble.
4. IATA's .air and WHO's
Anupam Chander wrote:
ICANN can still serve the interests of humankind by not privileging the
entities that proposed the TLDs when it decides who will administer the TLDs
it awards.
If this is a joke, it isn't very funny. ICANN is selling TLDs. The
$50K application fee makes that crystal
(Forwarded by James Love)
From: Copyright Coalition for Domain Names
Dear New TLD Applicant:
On behalf of the Intellectual
Property Constituency (IPC) of the ICANN Domain Name Supporting
Organization, I write to request a copy of your application, and to
initiate a dialogue with you on
With the event described below drawing near, and six of seven North-American
At Large candidates confirmed to attend, I want to make especially certain
to have sufficient RealServer capacity to accommodate everyone who wishes to
join via webcast.
Accordingly, it's extra important that everyone
And open sourced, auditable solution is much preferable over Joop's
version of "democracy."
--
Best regards,
Williammailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I certainly like an open source auditable election. Anyone notice
yet that with election.com running the ICANN at
At 18:33 24/09/00 -0400, Gordon Cook wrote:
I certainly like an open source auditable election. Anyone notice
yet that with election.com running the ICANN at large we will get no
such thing!?
Gordon,
I actually agree that open source voting software may be the best of options.
But Where
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Joop Teernstra wrote:
I went ahead and designed and commissioned the Polling Booth. I make its
use available for free. If it is going to be open source, I would like to
be paid what it is worth.
Then it's not really open source
1 - 100 of 4415 matches
Mail list logo
