Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] WG-WEB: responses to Jamie

[eric@hi-tek.com]

Hey I know we could just file a UDRP against Jefsey  ;- }

I think he should just hold on to the name and make us get another one.  Simple.
e

Richard Henderson wrote:

> What I'm trying to say is that in the world of democratic politics, a "minority" may get the highest number of votes, but the democratic will of the people may be expressed through a "coalition" of smaller parties.
>
> Eg : Imagine a UK election where
>
> Conservatives 40%
> Labour 31%
> LibDem 16%
>
> Clearly a coalition *could* be formed to outvote the Conservative group
>
> The same may apply with regard to our name vote (we just don't know without a clarifying poll)
>
> I believe you'd find a majority coalition in favour of jettisoning the "minority" ICANN name
>
> I don't actually think icannatlarge.org is REALLY the name most of our membership wants.
>
> And as the name doesn't even resolve, and as the owner of the name would prefer an alternative anyway - why do we stick with an (arguably) non-working non-accessible non-popular name?
>
> I argue the majority of voters did NOT want the name we've been landed with.
>
> And then there's the legality issue, which has yet to unfold
>
> Richard


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de