jay and all,
In a nutshell, you are right, Jay. And the process has been tainted
as a result, leading to complete distrust of that process in which
Joe Simms has been no small contributor.
Jay Fenello wrote:
At 03:02 PM 10/13/99 , Joe Sims wrote:
Jay Fenello in the news:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/10/circuits/articles/14spin.html
Is it relevant that someone is paid by an entity with a major
financial stake in the issues?
Richard Sexton and Tony Rutkowski have also acknowledged being paid
consultants of NSI. All three
Jay Fenello wrote:
At 03:02 PM 10/13/99 , Joe Sims wrote:
you understand, I am sure, but simply don't accept, that
others (like the
USG and what I percieve the vast majority of those in the Internet
community that are participating in this process) think that
what is being
done is
On 14 October 1999, Kent Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jay Fenello in the news:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/10/circuits/articles/14spin.html
Is it relevant that someone is paid by an entity with a major
financial stake in the issues?
Richard Sexton and Tony Rutkowski have
At 09:53 AM 10/14/99 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
Jay Fenello in the news:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/10/circuits/articles/14spin.html
Is it relevant that someone is paid by an entity with a major
financial stake in the issues?
Richard Sexton and Tony Rutkowski have also
Kent and all,
Well kent it seems from your response that you are feeling a bit
uncomfortable with some elements or comments of the article
as they may apply to you, eh? Does defamation suit loom on
the horizon for you perhaps? ;) You can bet on it!
But I found Rebecca's article quite
At 01:01 PM 10/14/99 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jay Fenello wrote:
At 03:02 PM 10/13/99 , Joe Sims wrote:
you understand, I am sure, but simply don't accept, that
others (like the
USG and what I percieve the vast majority of those in the Internet
community that are participating in
At 10:37 AM 10/14/99 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
At 09:53 AM 10/14/1999 , Kent Crispin wrote:
Is it relevant that someone is paid by an entity with a major
financial stake in the issues?
Richard Sexton and Tony Rutkowski have also acknowledged being paid
consultants of NSI. All three claim that
On Thu, Oct 14, 1999 at 10:07:25AM -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
On 14 October 1999, Kent Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jay Fenello in the news:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/10/circuits/articles/14spin.html
Is it relevant that someone is paid by an entity with a major
At 12:53 PM 10/14/99 , Kent Crispin wrote:
Jay Fenello in the news:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/10/circuits/articles/14spin.html
Is it relevant that someone is paid by an entity with a major
financial stake in the issues?
Hi Kent,
Thanks for the publicity :-)
BTW, I'm not sure I
Kent - watch your ass dear boy. Looks look's like the ICANN kook's are
going to start the spy trip. Your no Robert Shaw. Shaw is a fool with
some diplomatic immunity. Your welcome Kent to play the fool, just
remember you have no diplomatic immunity from libel and slander.
Now Kent, when do
Joe and all,
Well I imagine that Kent sees his ass every time he looks
into the mirror. ;) The close proximity of his ass to his face
has never ceased to amaze me. This situation not withstanding.
J. Baptista wrote:
Kent - watch your ass dear boy. Looks look's like the ICANN kook's are
On Thu, Oct 14, 1999 at 03:04:48PM -0400, Jay Fenello wrote:
At 12:53 PM 10/14/99 , Kent Crispin wrote:
Jay Fenello in the news:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/10/circuits/articles/14spin.html
Is it relevant that someone is paid by an entity with a major
financial stake in the
13 matches
Mail list logo
