I would third, but I want to see Jefsey's response, first. -s On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 16:30, NameCritic wrote: > I second that motion as well. > > Chris McElroy aka NameCritic > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com> > To: "DPF" <david@farrar.com> > Cc: <harivijapur@rediffmail.com>; <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>; > <atlarge-panel@lists.fitug.de> > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 8:02 AM > Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Our New Name Isn't... > > > > The present owner of icannatlarge.org is unable to transfer the name to > the > > panel. > > > > www.icannatlarge.org is presently "On Hold" > > > > This can be seen if you go to a Deleted Domains site like: > > > > http://www.deleteddomains.com/cgi-bin/browse.pl > > > > Show: .org > > Domains that were: "deleted or placed on hold" > > Enter: "in the last 60 days" > > that "contain" > > the letters "icann" > > > > CLICK "Show Domains" > > > > ...and you'll see that www.icannatlarge.org has been "On Hold" since > > 09-29-02 > > > > Therefore yes, David, I would prefer that we move for the second choice > > (www.atlarge.org) > > > > Richard > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: DPF <david@farrar.com> > > To: Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com> > > Cc: <harivijapur@rediffmail.com>; <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>; > > <atlarge-panel@lists.fitug.de> > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 8:39 PM > > Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Our New Name Isn't... > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2002 15:17:13 +0100, "Richard Henderson" > > <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com> wrote: > > > > >Look, could someone PLEASE clarify this situation? > > > > > >I'm wholly unhappy to proceed with this name, especially when it doesn't > > >resolve and there is continuing ambiguity. I also feel there is ambiguity > > as > > >to whether most people actually wanted ICANN in the organisation's name. > It > > >may be true that more people wanted icannatlarge.org than any ONE of the > > >other names, but that's because the "Icann" name was ONE name, whereas > the > > >"non-Icann" votes were split between three names. > > > > A preferential ballot overcomes this by rankings being re-distributed > > as the least popular drops off. There is IMO no question about the > > result. > > > > All we nee the panel to do is ask the current holder of > > icannatlarge.org to immediately transfer it to the name of this > > organisation and make it resolve. If they are unwilling to do this > > then implement the second choice. > > > > DPF > > > > > > -- > > david@farrar.com > > ICQ 29964527 > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de > > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part