Re: [icann-eu] Re: [ga] Reply to William

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

It is with sadness of heart and a brokenness of spirit that I see the end of the
GA.  I only hope it can survive the inventive take over by interests outside of
ICANN, with the willingness of the Staff to see it disentegrate.

Who now speaks for the dot commoners?  No one!  Tapps please.

Jeff Williams wrote:

> Danny and all assembly members,
>
> babybows.com wrote:
>
> > Hello William,
> >
> > I appreciate the fact that you have such strong opinions about what one
> > should expect from a real Chair.  It would have been nice to have seen you
> > vie for this elected position, but I suppose that it is human nature that
> > some in this world are more comfortable remaining on the sidelines as
> > critics.  This too is acceptable.  I usually rely on a critic's review when
> > I decide if a particular restaurant is worth frequenting, or if a movie
> > warrants being seen.
>
>   Interesting response here Danny.  It seems a bit off base however, due
> to
> the facts related by WXW in his earlier post regarding the agenda driven
> approach to the Chair and Alt-Chair's behavior, which has now become
> obvious.  As such, it would hardly be deemed appropriate I would guess
> from the GA members given the falling off of posts to the list sense
> earlier
> today.  However possibly this is the desired response that you and
> Patrick
> have in mind.  If so, it would therefore seem obvious that discussion is
> purposefully being discouraged which gains not headway towards solutions
> of consensus on issues before this assembly...  A shame to be sure.
>
> >
> >
> > Over the course of time, one gets to know whether a particular critic is
> > worth listening to.  I encourage you to continue criticizing whenever you
> > deem it appropriate to do so.  Only time, and your peers, will judge whether
> > your criticism is apt or misplaced.
>
>   Indeed this is so.  However a person with an open mind will be
> deligent
> in listening to anyone's posts or ideas put forth of a forum of this
> kind
> regardless of their particular list behavior.  To do otherwise would
> indicate
> that who's who it more important than what's what.  I am not
> particularly
> fond of WXW, however I always read his post diligently and with as much
> interest as anyone's.  I afford the same courtesy for every member of
> this
> assembly.  It is a shame that you or anyone would suggest otherwise,
> and does not show good faith as well.  :(
>
> >
> >
> > Although you have taken issue with my "agenda", I will certainly endeavor to
> > continue to promote focused discussions within our new mailing lists (this
> > is, after all, a good method to coordinate consensus, something that I
> > believe that you said a Chair should be doing).  I have noted with some
> > satisfaction that you have availed yourself of the opportunity to post on
> > the ga-roots list (at least sixteen times by my last count), and I am
> > pleased to see that you share the opinions of others on the ga-list (that
> > these are individuals that would prefer to work outside of the framework of
> > the DNSO on other mailing lists is another matter entirely).
>
>   If these new lists are outside the framework of the DNSO, how than did
> the
> recent announcement of banned members of the DNSO GA list migrate over
> to these new lists that are again, outside of the framework of the DNSO?
> Please advise....
>
> >
> >
> > Perhaps you would also like to post your thoughts regarding rules,
> > procedures and policies to the ga-int list where we can focus upon the
> > merits of your comments.  Six new lists do provide an opportunity for those
> > with a proclivity to post often to have their comments noted regularly.  We
> > have made it possible for you to post your thoughts as often as 35 times a
> > day (as long as posts are limited to 5 per day per list).  I would have
> > thought that you would have been appreciative of our efforts to offer you an
> > increased opportunity for substantive dialogue...
>
>   Well which is it Danny?  35 per day or 5 per day on these new lists to
> which
> you refer?  Which is it, are these new lists outside of the framework of
> the
> DNSO or not?  Again Please advise...
>
> >
> >
> > As we move forward towards the Stockholm meeting, we will need to determine
> > the "agenda" for the GA.  I would like to invite you to share with us your
> > thoughts on what that agenda should be.  As always, I look forward to your
> > comments.
>
>   Nice ending.  However you comments above seem to belie you true
> intentions in this ending....
>
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Danny
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members 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:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208