(and if I may Dave and others who seem to have come new on the list).
Most of us (if not all of us) on the list would value input from intelligent
and valued persons like yourself. It will only enrich our cause and
progress...
However, to be fair to those of us already existing on the list (including
yourselves eventually), May I request you to...
1. Please give it some time and some leeway on the list before you hit the
rest of us all off as ICANN or NSI bashers or what ever..
Its only human to assume something based on ones past experience and reading
a couple of postings. While technically or literally you probably might have
interpreted us right based on the limited number postings you read.
In totality of larger context of things, which includes - past postings
(probably missed by you) and with it, the preset tone, expectations and
implicit context existing from prior to your coming aboard - which will take
a while more to understand/absorb.
Will it not be reasonable on our part to point out to you that you might
have missed considering soemthing in the mix before classifying or bashing
us ? Hey you are as human as us - aren't you ? :)
2. We are a democratic forum here. And all of us come from different
backgrounds and point of views (similar to the constituency we take on
ourselves to represent). The true sign of it is in the way all of opinions
would not match.
There will be some difference in opinions expressed on the list by the
members and the official position of the total group.
But we are held together by the common respect and regard we share for each
others opinion.
The strengh comes from being open minded and allowing different points of
view (including your own) to increment the common goal at ICANN or any other
forum.
3. When I posted my message - I clearly put where I was coming from and what
my past was - so others could figure out what my point was and context I was
coming from and make a fair judgement on my opinion expressed.
Please may I request you to post the same on yourself so we all can
understand and appreciate your points better to. That way it will keep the
whole environment positive and conductive but also aid us all correct or
point things to one another before it turns negative.
4. We are a new organisation running on voluntary efforts - I donot know for
sure (can guess its Joe) who exactly is webmaster for our site or past
backgrounds of our other founding members but for one thing for sure, they
have been doing an par excellence job so far abett with some strumbling.
I can bet, your joining did not go thru in the first attempt because of some
technical reason rather than sinister ones - you are here now aren't you :)
Personally I think you and Dave are two great members. Just give it time and
leeway folks..lets all learn and progress together !
Sri
My background (in this context) :-
My only contact with those on the list is thru this list alone. I donot
personally know any of them. My participation on others list on internet is
limited.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kent Crispin [mailto:kent@songbird.com]
Sent: Friday, June 11, 1999 11:25 AM
To: idno@radix.co.nz
Subject: [IDNO:259] Re: [vcerf@MCI.NET: ICANN Commentary (Mike Roberts,
David Post)]
On Fri, Jun 11, 1999 at 07:15:44PM +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> At 17:33 10/06/1999 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >Since ICANN and ISOC bashing seems to be a major topic on this list,
> >here's some material to counterbalance:
> >
> Please don't engage in myth-making , Kent. There has been no ISOC bashing
> on our list, --our member Kevin Conolly was quite wrong and off topic with
> that; we were actually critiquing NSI-- and ICANN is a structure we intend
> to become part of.
I've only been on the list for a short time (my earlier attempt to
join seems to have failed somehow). But in that short time...here
are some quotes from recent messages...
Roeland seems to disagree with you:
"Thirdly, Kevin's point about the ISOC bashing should be
considered. Not all of us ISOC members are evil nor are we all
academics.<grin>"
And then he says:
"Forth, when Dyson made that statemnent she unilaterally spoke in
direct opposition to the ICANN's own by-laws. If it sticks, there
is clear evidence of lack of process. When an organization doesn't
even follow its own rules, but rather the voice of a single
individual, then it is not an organization. It is a dictatorship
and the single voice is its tyrant. I also believe that Esther
very much knew what she was doing when she did this and did it
anyway."
You said:
"When the interim ICANN board decided to gerrymander the DNSO into
constituencies..."
Srikanth Narra said:
"It was extremely heartening to see ICANN and NSI at loggerheads at
Berlin..."
and:
"It lid a tiny flame of hope that the fight between them would
explode and be hard, tough and really nasty."
and:
"ICANN seems to be hell bent on moving them to the irrelevant role
of being just another domain name issuers and in process 'Surping'
NSI's traditional leverages of - policy implementation, root server
control and domain pricing - without subjecting themselves (ICANN)
to any kind of accountability or mandate what so ever other than
some spin doctoring in media."
and:
"As thing stand, right now, compared to ICANN - NSI seems to be an
angel to me."
and Karl Auerbach:
"Who am I to complain that those wise board members who set forth
the constituencies did so without thinking through all of this."
and
"The interesting part is how ICANN's behaviour has managed to make
NSI look good by contrast."
and
"Certainly ICANN's board itself is not providing a model of
adherence to its fundamental charter."
and
"But then again, ICANN's board has been no white knight. It is
ICANN's actions that make it comparatively easy to digest NSI's
manipulations."
And of course, Andy Gardner's quote from
comp.protocols.tcpip.domains, which I won't further quote, had a
definite anti-ISOC message.
> This list is not for bashing, but for constructing.
As an ICANN supporter, I find it a definitely hostile environment.
That is a fact.
> Otherwise your crosspost was appreciated.
> Please crosspost any peaceful overtures that you see on the ISOC list. Is
> it an open list?
No -- it is the members-discuss list of ISOC.
-- Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain
-- This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz. For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/