Re: [atlarge-discuss] web site

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

Joop and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 07:37 p.m. 3/10/2002 +0100, Richard Henderson wrote:
>
> >All I'm asking is an immediate review of the status of icannatlarge.org
> >(currently locked and on hold) and a simple YES or NO vote ... not to
> >overturn democracy, but to clarify democracy... if people vote "YES" we
> >would prefer to have a name without ICANN in it, then THAT'S not
> >anti-democratic... that becomes the democratic will of the membership in an
> >evolving and fluid situation, with new details coming to light
>
> It disturbs me deeply to see such a statement from an advocate of democracy
> that I thought sincere.

  I still believe that Richard is sincere.  He seeks a redress in the form
of a motion that has been seconded.  As this is a democratic organization
we have an obligation to conduct the vote that he has initiated.

  I do believe that Richard is making a mistake with this motion, however.
But I can also understand his motivation(s) which he has clearly stated
in several posts here on this forum.  I don't believe however that
those motivations are justified for such a motion.

  Jefsey, you should immediately transfer the DN ICANNATLARGE.ORG
as you originally promised to do if it was selected.  Another hosting
service can be found without too much of a problem.

  Joop, your motivations as well have been made clear as well for opposing
Richards motion w/second.  You believe that ICANN is the only game
in town and we must deal with them.  That is not so, but I can also understand
such a motivation given you long history.

>
>
> The members *have* spoken.

  Yes they have.  They may wish to speak again on this subject however.

>
>
> They were presented with an already limited choice. Now you don't like the
> result, you want, like Joanna attempted during the polls,  to limit  the
> choice even further?
>
> DN misconfiguration (funny that, icannatlarge.org  worked fine last March
> and even had a link, logging all traffic, to our icannatlarge.com website)
> is a most  feeble excuse that can be rectified in 10 minutes.

  Yes.  As a matter of fact ICANNATLARGE.ORG resolved just
fine this past Monday.  Doa whois on the Name Servers and you will
see that the problem is in the Name server misconfiguration.  Hence
why ICANNATLARGE.ORG no longer resolves.

>
>
> Has it not occurred to you  that it is ICANN staff  that would be most
> pleased seeing us walk away from the icann string and make ourselves
> irrelevant to them?   Saves them the effort.
>
> --Joop
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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