Joe Baptista wrote:
Roberto I posted the communication to Mr. Shaw not with the
intention of
encouraging discussion, but to provide notice.
I have no interest in participating in this discussion. I
suggest those
who enjoy the gossip of common housewives proceed to do so in private.
On Fri, 10 Sep 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry to have hit a nerve, it was not my intention.
You didn't. I just hate to repeat myself. I think I made that clear.
Frankly, I thought your letter to Mr. Shaw was a joke, but since you seem to
take it seriously, may I ask you to provide
Roberto and all,
I don't see where Joe owes Bob Shaw an apology. Rather the
reverse would be more appropriate.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe Baptista wrote:
Roberto I posted the communication to Mr. Shaw not with the
intention of
encouraging discussion, but to provide notice.
I
On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, Dr. Brian C. Hollingsworth wrote:
So, basically what you are saying is that you "talk the talk", but you don't "walk
the walk".
Put up or shut up.
No Brian. What it means is what it says. We at PCCF are busy little
beavers, and unfortunately there is no beaver
On 10-Sep-99 J. Baptista wrote:
Again I assure you Mr. Shaw is not a priority. We have appropriately
censored him and will proceed to the next step just as soon as we can
move Mr. Shaw up on our priority ladder. Maybe something next week.
If you aren't going to make a "federal case" out
Mark:
I know everone is getting hot under the collor in anticipation of the PCCF
Shaw tango. You'll have to wait boys and girls.
I wonder where the people on this list studied law. There is never a need
to rush. Only lemings rush, and they end up flying off cliffs.
We have the advantage of
Roberto and all,
ICANN is and has been unstable almost from the start. Lets look at the facts
shall we.
1.) The ICANN is financially unstable fiscally irresponsible. This
is well known public knowledge presently.
2.) It has made policy decisions that it KNOWS do not have any
On Thu, 9 Sep 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Due to my incomplete knowledge of the English language, I can't tell if it
is libel and slander, but one thing I can say.
I know Mr. Shaw personally, and I can't believe that he could think that you
and/or your company could be instrumental in the
Joe and all,
Good for you Joe. Robert Shaw has a nasty habit of this sort of
behavior that goes back several years (See gTLD-Discuss Archives).
As such it is amazing to me that the ICANN "APPOINTED" him and his
ilk to the GAC.
J. Baptista wrote:
Wednesday, September 08, 1999
Mr. Robert
Joe Baptista wrote:
Dear Mr. Shaw:
I am writing in reference to allegations and claims made by
you in your
capacity as a representative of GAC, ICANN and the ITU. Your
email to a
number of newsgroups (including the comp.dcom.telecom
conference) claimed
our employees; officers or
10 matches
Mail list logo
