On Sun, Jun 13, 1999 at 04:00:51PM +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> Dear IDNO Members,
>
> Luckily we already have a good voting system in place.
> It is easy to go to the website and show our collective will again.
>
> I must ask you to consider ostracising two people who have invaded our list
> and who are trying to play a well-tried routine at the expense of our unity.
Unity is not possible, required, or even desirable.
> These people are known through their thousands of postings over the years
> of the DN wars. For some, they *are* the DN wars.
> Their postings are often disingenuous. They are often impolite and in
> breach of good form.
> Take for example the way Mr Crispin barged in, demanding to know where the
> archives were.
What I actually said was:
"Just out of curiosity, is there a browsable archive of this list?
If so, could someone send me the URL?"
I can't see how by any stretch you could call that "barging in", or
"demanding". I can't see by any stretch how you could call that
"impolite" -- quite the contrary, in fact: generally, when one joins
a list, it is considered polite to familiarize oneself with the
ongoing discussion, and asking about archives is a completely natural
thing to do. Furthermore, an archive is an absolutely invaluable
asset for any body trying to develop policy, especially when the
policy development is supposed to be open and transparent.
> Or Mr Crocker, the list-guest who "does not necessarily agree" with us,
> demanding that the listowner ceases a thread on peacemaking with ISOC,
> "immediately".
That is simply not what was said. You can browse the actual text of
the messages at http://songbird.com/kent/idno. (It's not *that* hard
to set up an archive...)
> At this stage we are still extremely vulnerable. We are still less than a
> hundred people who still have to come to a division of tasks to channel our
> energies to further the best interests of all Individual DN owners.
> We cannot afford to have paid people in our midst who have only one goal
> and that is to thwart us in organizing a credible constituency.
> And credible we will have to be. You heard that from Mr Crocker, and in
> that, I'm afraid, he is right.
This note you have just posted is BY FAR the most serious blow to the
credibility of this effort that I have seen -- it may very well be
fatal. Dave Crocker and I are both individual domain name holders,
and meet every possible criteria for membership in an individual
domain name holders constituency. Our messages have in fact been
polite -- even, by Internet standards, restrained.
We cannot reasonably be barred from these discussions.
> He said other things that are right too, and that makes what he is doing
> so insidious.
> Since he himself professed that we are better off without these DNS wars on
> our list, he makes it easier for us to ask him to do the honourable thing
> and leave us in peace, doing what he tells us is good for us.
> I would like to ask Mr Crispin, who reposts private messages and insults
> listmembers, to do the same thing.
I reposted that private message because it was unbelievable affront
to democratic processes. Your present message is, as well, but at
least it is public. In particular you claim that my comment to Karl
Auerbach:
"In any case, "bashing" is a matter of tone as much as it is of
content. It would be a pleasant relief to hear something in a
positive tone from you."
is an ad hominem. It is not. Nor is it an insult. It is a civil
and polite expression of my frustration with Karl's continued
negative statements about ICANN.
> I ask both of you to leave. Please unsubscribe from idno.
I'm sorry, no. That would be a contradiction to a lot of things I
consider very important.
> I am not silencing the discussion with you. All our members are free to go
> to the unmoderated ifwp list to continue the argument with you. Just not
> on our construction-list.
>
> To back up my request I am asking for a second for this motion and then ask
> the idno members of this list to vote on the issue. I hope you still
> remember login and password. Otherwise, ask me privately.
You are deliberately trying to silence those who disagree with you.
This is unbelievable, coming from someone who professes to be a
champion of democracy.
Your motion is completely contrary to democratic principles, and by
creating a climate hostile to contrary opinion you are perilously
close to invalidating any claims to be a DNSO constituency. You
should withdraw your motion.
> Please read again the article in computerwire. It is in this context that
> I'm asking you to exercise your rights in our agora and to drop your
> ostrakon in the ballot box.
I appreciate the comparison to Socrates, but I'm not likely to drink
any Hemlock :-)
-- Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain