Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-12 Thread Diane Cabell
> >> No definition of who are members and who are not? No exchange of > >> dues for a certificate, even if only a card, giving me the rights of > >> a member? No defined process for electing representatives of the > >> membership to the organization's management? No, my friend. I don't > >> play t

RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-12 Thread Bill Lovell
At 12:30 AM 4/12/99 -0400, you wrote: >At 11:08 PM 4/11/99 , Bill Lovell wrote: Some time in the distant past I spoke of a buck or so per web site to ICANN. >>> >>>A tax on websites is insane. A membership fee is rational. >>> >>"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word >

RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-12 Thread Jay Fenello
At 11:08 PM 4/11/99 , Bill Lovell wrote: >>>Some time in the distant past I spoke of a buck or so per web site to ICANN. >> >>A tax on websites is insane. A membership fee is rational. >> >"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word >would smell as sweet." Shakespeare, Romeo an

RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-11 Thread Bill Lovell
At 10:23 PM 4/11/99 -0400, you wrote: >At 06:19 PM 4/11/99 -0700, you wrote: >>At 05:56 PM 4/11/99 -0700, you wrote: >> >> >>Some time in the distant past I spoke of a buck or so per web site to ICANN. > >A tax on websites is insane. A membership fee is rational. > "What's in a name? That which w

RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-11 Thread Richard J. Sexton
At 06:19 PM 4/11/99 -0700, you wrote: >At 05:56 PM 4/11/99 -0700, you wrote: > >[Big snips all around] > >>So do I. However, even the most wealthy would not part with that princely >>sum without a reason to do so. > >>I see that you are taking things to heart. >> >>> No definition of who are memb

RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-11 Thread Bill Lovell
At 05:56 PM 4/11/99 -0700, you wrote: [Big snips all around] >So do I. However, even the most wealthy would not part with that princely >sum without a reason to do so. >I see that you are taking things to heart. > >> No definition of who are members and who are not? No exchange of >> dues for

RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-11 Thread Roeland M.J. Meyer
As Michael Sondow spake: > Izumi Aizu- > > Thank you for your frank response to my posting yesterday on the MAC > recommendations. After reading it, and because of your obvious > forthrightness and sincerity, I have no doubt that you, at least, > have none but the best motivations behind the dec

Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-11 Thread Richard J. Sexton
> >Richard Sexton, in a posting yesterday to the IFWP list, asked very >simply why there was such a fuss, since the dues could be defined >as, say, five times the price of a coca cola in the country of >residence of the applicant. Do you think that a person unwilling to >invest that modest sum, ev

Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] COMMENTS ON M.A.C. RECOMMENDATIONS of MARCH 18

1999-04-11 Thread Michael Sondow
Izumi Aizu- Thank you for your frank response to my posting yesterday on the MAC recommendations. After reading it, and because of your obvious forthrightness and sincerity, I have no doubt that you, at least, have none but the best motivations behind the decisions of the committee that you supp