Re: [atlarge-discuss] Membership

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

James and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

  Yes, I believe that your conclusion (See bottom) is essentially
a correct one, James.  Well done!

  I earlier just posted a more direct and confrontational response to
Danny also to illustrate essentially the same point as you, James.
But I also thought while reading Danny's "Oath in disguise", how
would a resident of China be able to sign such an "Oath"?  Or
also I thought while reading Danny's "Oath", that I was standing
in front of Comrade Stalin ( While he was still alive that is!)
and avowing to uphold the Communist manifesto!  >;)

James S. Tyre wrote:

> At 12:26 AM 10/20/2002 -0400, DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> >Dear James,
> >
> >The points you raise have merit, but I was not looking for a loyalty oath...
> >rather, a declaration of intent to accompany the sign-up mechanism, such as:
> >
> >By registering to become a member of this organization, I avow that I am
> >committed to the White Paper's vision of At-Large representation within
> >ICANN.
>
> But, leaving aside questions of legal enforceability, isn't that precisely
> a loyalty oath?
>
> What if, hypothetically speaking, my vision of a meaningful (and real) at
> large differs significantly from the White Paper?  Assuming I won't avow
> falsely, should I be excluded?  ("I" here is generic, for
> convenience.)  What if I don't know what the White Paper's vision is, are
> we to be so elitist that we exclude only those who know or who are willing
> to do the homework, assuming that they won't avow untruthfully?  What about
> folks who genuinely are undecided about what should be done, just have a
> general sense that something should be, and/or just want to acquire more
> knowledge, and are willing to pay the dues (if we have them) to get that
> knowledge here?  If we are to achieve critical mass, we need the part-time
> student cafeteria workers, not just the fully committed to a narrow vision,
> don't we?
>
> Again, I am being a bit more confrontational and rhetorical than is my
> norm, but I'm trying to illustrate that, in my view, there is no suitable
> vow, for many reasons.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> James S. Tyre                               mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com
> Law Offices of James S. Tyre          310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
> 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512               Culver City, CA 90230-4969
>
> This man, who seems to have led a life of unrelieved insignificance,
> must have been astonished to find himself suddenly putting the
> Government of the United States in such fear that it was afraid to
> tell him why it was afraid of him.
>
> Shaughnessy v. Mezei, 345 U.S. 206 (1953) (Jackson, J., dissenting)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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