Re: [atlarge-discuss] List/website/connectivity

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Judyth and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

espresso@e-scape.net wrote:

> Forgive me, all, but I opened another missive from Jeff Williams by mistake and feel obliged to have one more try...

  You again failed.  The missive is yours again I am afraid.
(See more on that below your missive comments )

>
>
> At 17:59 -0700 2002/10/08, Jeff Williams wrote:
> >Judyth and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,
> >
> >espresso@e-scape.net wrote:
> >> That's all very well, Bruce, but we are in no position to supply the developing countries, or even the poor in our own, with that technology.
> >
> >  Very true here.  In fact as I have been harping on for months now, this
> >organization cannot even take donations legally or ethically so that we can
> >pay our own way!
>
> Indeed you have been harping on it for months, and I can't help wondering why. Unless the purpose of an organization is to collect money for charitable use, it has no business collecting them.

  Wrong!  1.) Initial funds can be legally collected as long as we are in process
of actually creating or becoming a legal non-profit entity.  2.) We have yet
to actually officially decide what form of legal entity this organization should take
so collecting funds is not a charitable endeavor as of yet.  Hence such a missive
as you state it Judyth is grossly incorrect on this point alone.  But I shall
continue regardless of that.  3.) Several forms of legal entities have before
you were even around and this particular forum was created/provided,
been discussed and considered.  All of which, BTW can legally collect
initial funding at any time as long a we are up front as to the future
of those funds at the time of collection and/or can return those funds
should that need to be done for a number of well known and legally
accepted reasons.

> At the moment, we are neither a charitable organization nor any other kind of organization; we have not yet determined what we will do, let alone how and how much that effort will cost. A prospective donor could easily find better use for his money.

  Very true here.  There is always risk when donating money for the donator.
Most donators  know this all too well as the not so long ago Red Cross
fiasco clearly shows.  None the less those funds can still be collected,
and used if we are up front as to that risk clearly and follow the rules/laws
set forth in the venue or jurisdiction in which we start our filing for legal
determination.

  You see Judyth, I have done this sort of thing for quite a number of years,
for 4 separate companies that I have personally started, or other 501 c3
organizations over  the years, and have quite a bit of very successful
experience in doing it.  I have two personal atty.'s that I always clear
such funding models that I have developed or borrowed and modified
for special situations such as the one this organization faces.

>
>
> This group has never set out to be the provider of technology to the developing world or the poor, charitable as it would be to do so.

  And I never thought that we should, but perhaps if the members wish to and
we at that point in time have the funds, we could, to one degree or another.
But as I said, first we need to pay our own way!  >;)


> That is not to say we needn't care whether our Web site is usable by people with less up-to-date equipment or less-than-ideal connections. The former requires pots of money; the latter, only a little consideration and forethought.

  Yes also agreed to a point.  We could and should be more simple in our
web design for efficiency's sake if for not other. But we should not design
to the lowest common denominator...

>
>
> >It is deplorable that by now this has not been addressed.
> >As I recall Jefsey before this forum was put up, the he promised to
> >register this organization as a legal entity in France.  That as far as I >know, has yet to occur.  Why is that?  Well if I were guessing, and I am, >it is because Jefsey does not have the FUNDS to pay for such.
>
> Save your guesses, Jeff. We don't know what Jefsey's (or anyone's) financial state might be, and most of us don't actually care to: it's none of our business.

  Well not too long ago Jefsey and I exchanged some private E-Mail.  He
doesn't have the funds!  >;)  I still have those posts archived in my E-mail
DB.

>
>
> There are better, more logical reasons why this group has not been registered -- namely,
> 1. that we are not yet capable of registering as a collective entity since we lack a statement of purpose, signed agreement amongst us for joint proprietorship, designated founding officers, or any of the other stuff governments require for purposes of such registration;

  This depends on what sort of registration you are referring to.  Hence
as stated it is incorrect.

>
> 2. that although any one of us could simply register something-or-other as "ICANNatlarge", the result would not be the organization we're trying to build but a sole proprietorship set up as the proprietor decided without reference to the rest of the membership.

  Only again partly true as stated.  Please seek a good business legal
advice before making such statements in the future.  I always do! >;)

>
>
> >...And as a result have been
> >severely criticized for doing so!  Jeeezzz!  How the hell do you or any
> >member expect to get the ball rolling Judyth!!???
>
> As our late Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau once said, "Just watch me."

  Well I am watching.  I will watch closer.  >;)

>
>
> >> Not even the UN or the World Bank has come anywhere near a viable plan to deploy the ICTs by 2010, let alone immediately.
> >
> >  Mos to the members of the UN would be lucky if they could find there way
> >to the bathroom...  So that comparison, as our president has made pretty
> >clear, is pointless and really not relevant...
>
> As your president has already made clear to the world, he has zero respect for the United Nations, the rights of any nation but his own, the Constitution of the United States of America, the rule of law, or anything else which might distinguish us from our barbarian ancestors.

  Well you are not expanding to something that President Bush has not said
or even considered.  In fact quite the opposite.  If you saw his speech
last night, you of course would know that...  If you heard and saw his
speech in front of the UN, you also would not make such and expansion
into this sort of grandstanding diatribe.  I am not a huge fan of my president,
I did not vote for him.  I would not likely vote for him when he is up for
reelection.  But I would never construe what both of his most recent
speeches clearly outlined as you have here.  Utterly despicable Judyth!

> He is also as illlogical and inarticulate as you are, Jeff: the difference is that he's notoriously the most ignorant president since Grover Cleveland (as well as being "as dumb as a box of rocks", as we say up here) but you actually have some intelligence and we only wish you'd learn to apply it better.

  Inarticulate?  Really now Judyth.  How quaint, how gosh!  Well he is a
native son from the great state of Texas.  He is the elected president of
the most powerful and greatest democracy in the known world,  he is
respected all over the globe, and beloved by the common man/woman
for his plain speaking style.  But he is no fool, he is a pretty politically
estate, and has great command of the facts.  But he is no political
expert/past master as President Clinton was.  Sure he makes mistakes.
Even Jesus made mistakes..  But of course not Judyth, eh?  >;)

>
>
> >  Well they can get some glasses!  >;)  Hell Judyth, INEGroup donated some
> >900 hand held computers with Wi-FI capability this year alone in south east
> >asia...
> >
> >  INEGroup has some 1800 visually handicapped members, and we don't
> >have a problem in keeping them up to speed.  But of course again this takes
> >$$.
>
> That is quite impressive. Unfortunately 900 handhelds amongst 5 billion people doesn't quite solve the problem.

  No it sure doesn't solve ALL of the problem but it is a small or tiny step
in the right direction.

> As for INEGroup (or us) requiring extra funds to make its Web site more accessible to the visually handicapped, you just might want to have a look at http://www.w3.org/wai for Web accessibility guidelines that cost nothing and at the excellent E-Government and Future Health bulletins at http://www.headstar.com which are formatted to make life easier for those using screen readers.

  I have read  those.  They are very good considerations.  Microsoft also
has a free program for the visually impaired.  My father is very visually impaired.
He is legally blind.  So Judyth, again you have put you foot or both feet in
you mouth.  I am fully aware of many such facilities that can and do aid
the visually impaired that are no cost or very low cost.  We [INEGroup]
have deployed or implemented some 300 in the past year or so in the US
and your home country Canada.  I bet you didn't know that now did you?  >;)
We work through the AARP and other similar organizations to get these
things done when and where we can.  Where we cannot, we do it ourselves.

>
>
> >This organization doesn't yet have any $$ to speak of yet, and doesn't
> >seem to want any either.  Pardon my bluntness here, but that CRAP don't
> >cut it Judyth!
>
> It is not that no money is wanted but that one does not collect money for nothing.

  I do now on occasion, and have a number of times over a number of years.
Sure this organization could not collect funds for no cost indefinitely, but
for INITIAL funds, we could for quite awhile.

> Charitable organizations, wherever registered, collect funds for a charitable purpose, while thus far we are talking only about advocacy against ICANN and such at some point in the future IF we get off the ground.

  I don't know if all of the members are against ICANN or not.  Some surely
are.  I have always said that where we can work with ICANN or any other
organization with similar goals and methods, than it may be wise to do so.
Where we have differences, we don't.  Where we are strongly opposed
we use whatever reasonable and legal means to oppose.  This can work
for us in collecting funding.  It is not necessarily a detriment Judyth!  So
try to think outside of your little box that you seem to have put yourself into.

>
> In case you hadn't heard, talk really IS cheap -- it costs nothing to sound off on a mailing list; what may involve some legitimate costs is still undefined so I don't believe we're in a position to ask others to pay for it!

  I do multitasking every day.  I can chew gum and walk at the same time!  >;)
So I can talk the talk while at the same time walk the walk.  I do it every
day!  >;)  Try it sometime, you might get the hang of it and like it too!  >;)

>
>
> >> It seems to me that the last thing the planet needs is yet another organization to represent the interests of the technically-inclined and the affluent, which simply dismisses the needs of the rest on the grounds that some day some of them may have what we have now. Isn't that part of what we object to in ICANN's behaviour?
> >
> >  Yes your right here Judyth, it is in part why we object to ICANN's
> >behavior.  But only in part...  There are many other reasons as well
> >even from the more affluent.
>
> No doubt. The next question is "Exactly what do we want to do about it, and what will it cost to implement that action?"

 The first part of this, your question is a good one indeed!  I don't know all
of the answer to it.  The second part of your question is easy.  It will cost
whatever it costs, and we must find a way, with a good funding model, to
pay for it!  >;)

> With a statement of purpose, 1000+ members can surely come up with a viable plan and a suitable structure, at which point funding agencies and private donors just might be interested.

  I know several that are already interested.  I posted to Bruce one of them
in his local area.  I wonder when Bruce will go door knocking on this
fellow?

>
>
> Another message will follow soon with suggestions as to what type of organization this might be if I ruled the world and could have whatever I liked.

  My we all thank the good lord that you do not rule the world!  But I look
forward to reading it anyway with baited breath and immense anticipation! >;)

>
>
> Regards,
>
> Judyth
>
> ##########################################################
> Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
> Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
> ##########################################################
> "A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
> ##########################################################
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



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