[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: WG-DNS name protection



Bruce and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

Bruce Young wrote:

> Stephen Waters wrote:
>
> |  Argue the point and get on with it. Ad hominem adds nothing.
>
> Here, Here!  :)

  Agreed.  Ow of only Stephen could practice that which he speaks...  >;)

>
>
> |  I imagine Panel members of a voluntary organization daily
> |  subject to public criticism in the midst of their personal workload and
> |  familial responsibilities will respond to ad hominem even less.
>
> I try to read through the flame to understand the heat causing it, but I
> agree it would be easier, if we all were less radicalized by our long
> exposure with ICANN and their back-stabbing ways.

  The fact that anyone volunteers for such responsibilities in now way
excuses them even to the smallest degree from constructive critical
comments/observations and questions.  Yes, the characterization that
some members have made regarding ad hominem are often times
a matter of perception or lack there of.

> We might be less willing
> then to see a potential conspirator behind every post.

  More openness  and transparency would go far further in
discussing such problems.

>
>
> |  You don't really believe some Panel members have been absent out of
> |  laze, do you?
>
> I for one was off line most of the time since Friday, and just got back on
> tonight.  AT&T says it was a bad cable amplifier between them and me.  But I
> made a point of "stacking up" my replies in my outbox in case it came back
> up.

  But other panel members don't have this legitimate excuse do they Bruce?
No, of course they don't...

>
>
> And routinely my "real life" is challenging enough as it stands.  But since
> being elevated to the panel I have made a point of keeping up on panel
> business daily.

  Well you weren't "Elevated", but I understand your gist anyway Bruce.  >;)

>  And now thgat WG-OUTREACH is up and running, I consider its
> conversations my second priority, and have Outlook pulling them out
> separately as well.  So don't be surprized if I still get behind on the
> general conversations this forum from time to time.

  Practiced diligence will keep you from getting behind, Bruce...

>
>
> Bruce Young
> Portland, Oregon USA
> byoung651@attbi.com
> http://www.barelyadequate.info
> --------------------------------------------
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.org and Join ICANN At Large!
>
> |  I, for one, do not support or elect people based on negative
> |  campaigning. I imagine Panel members of a voluntary organization daily
> |  subject to public criticism in the midst of their personal workload and
> |  familial responsibilities will respond to ad hominem even less. I would
> |  certainly be reluctant to hire a person for a job if they flamed me in
> |  public about something beyond my control. I would think to myself "Does
> |  not play well with others. Cannot be trusted to do the job right."
> |
> |  You don't really believe some Panel members have been absent out of
> |  laze, do you? While I agree they should excuse themselves or designate a
> |  proxy, unfortunately we're in sort of a Catch-22 here with lacking
> |  procedures, participation guidelines, etc. We need them to do something
> |  but they're in a bind and unable to do what we need, and we have no
> |  procedure yet for overruling that situation.
> |
> |  . Does yelling about it do anything at all to solve the Catch-22?
> |  . Does sending repeated mails to the list regarding Gupta's absence make
> |  him any more likely to show up?
> |  . Does your manner make the Panel more or less likely to think you'd use
> |  the website as a bully pulpit?
> |
> |
> |
> |  > > However, as an individual that's fine, of course.
> |  > >
> |  > > 2. The Slashcode-ish look is ok. You really need to change those <td
> |  > > bgcolor="#ffffff"> backgrounds to delineate between various content
> |  > > spaces, though.
> |  >
> |  > That is not a problem.  The site I sent you all to look at is
> |  a mock-up of a possible
> |  > layout, not a finished product.
> |  >
> |  > > Personally, I prefer CSS to bgcolor declarations (easier
> |  > > on the file downloads, too...) but users of ancient browsers may need
> |  > > this deprecated crutch.
> |  >
> |  > We're trying to be inclusive here Stephen, I've been to public
> |  libraries here in
> |  > Toronto that are still running older browsers that do not
> |  render CSS correctly.  I've
> |  > even left out unecessary graphics for those on slow
> |  connections...  Anyway, it was an
> |  > example of what can be done, not what must be done.  But, has
> |  anyone else offered up
> |  > another option?
> |
> |
> |  No one has, as far as I know. I was just offering constructive
> |  criticism.
> |
> |  $0.02USD
> |  -s
> |
> |  > > On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 17:06, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> |  > > > http://www.worldatlarge.org/index.php
> |  > > >
> |  > > > Sincerely,
> |  > > >
> |  > > > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> |  > > >
> |  > > > Hans Klein wrote:
> |  > > >
> |  > > > > Sotiris,
> |  > > > >
> |  > > > > If you have a mock-up web site, I am sure we would all
> |  be eager to see it.
> |  > > > >
> |  > > > > Can you post the URL?
> |  > > > >
> |  > > > > Hans
> |  > > > >
> |  > > > > At 02:15 PM 10/16/2002 -0400, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> |  > > > > >DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > Jamie,
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > Before you begin questioning the relationship
> |  between established user
> |  > > > > > > organizations and ICANN, you might want to ask if
> |  your own group,
> |  > > > > > without any
> |  > > > > > > organizational documents, without even a mission
> |  statement, bylaws or
> |  > > > > > > charter, even qualifies as an organization suitable
> |  for recognition as an
> |  > > > > > > at-large structure.
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Perhaps a dis-organization, then?  Especially of late.
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Before I received this email from Danny, I was about to
> |  post a link to the
> |  > > > > >list
> |  > > > > >directing all of you to a mock-up web site which Hans
> |  requested I put together
> |  > > > > >(even though I had ALREADY set up the PHPNuke site for
> |  all of you to view a
> |  > > > > >couple months ago!  Remember that ladies and
> |  gentlemen?!?  Check the
> |  > > > > >archives, if
> |  > > > > >you like...).  However, having read Danny's email I
> |  stopped myself and
> |  > > > > >decided to
> |  > > > > >visit the Panel's closed list archive for a look at how
> |  our leaders are going
> |  > > > > >about the business of this "organization".  Much to my
> |  surprise, I saw a
> |  > > > > >motion
> |  > > > > >from Jamie Love (seconded by Hans Klein) to make Brett
> |  Faussett the new
> |  > > > > >webmaster.  No offense against Brett, but where's he
> |  been for the last couple
> |  > > > > >months? I didn't hear him volunteering his services
> |  when a new webmaster was
> |  > > > > >being sought.  Or, ( as is probably the case) is this
> |  some kind of a
> |  > > > > >compromise
> |  > > > > >selection to placate Joop?  In any case, if this is the
> |  direction the Panel
> |  > > > > >wishes to take, then I wish them all the power in the
> |  world.  However, I
> |  > > > > >cannot
> |  > > > > >for a moment understand why the WG-Web members (of
> |  which I am one) were not
> |  > > > > >consulted?
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > As per the Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform's
> |  Second Interim
> |  > > > > > > Implementation Report:  "We agree that individual at
> |  large entities should
> |  > > > > > > meet some "accreditation" standard, and we find the
> |  criteria and standards
> |  > > > > > > recommended by the Assistance Group to be an
> |  attractive list."
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > This "list" stipulates structured, self-sustaining
> |  entities that engage in
> |  > > > > > > outreach and post current information about the
> |  organization's aims,
> |  > > > > > > structure, constituents, working mechanisms, and
> |  current leadership.
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > 1.  Your aims are not posted
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >To date I submitted TWO different versions of Mission
> |  Statements for this
> |  > > > > >organization (both several months ago) which elicited
> |  next to no comments, and
> |  > > > > >yet there is still no substantive work produced by the
> |  'power elite' among
> |  > > > > >us on
> |  > > > > >this issue.  Shameful.  This and the webmaster issue
> |  noted above are enough to
> |  > > > > >put off persons (such as myself) who are willing to contribute
> |  > > > > >substantively...
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > 2.  You have no organizational structure
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Oh, but we do... dis-organization.
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > 3.  You are not self-sustaining
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >If bombast and self-important bluster were the fuel of
> |  the day, I'd say we're
> |  > > > > >self-perpetuating rather than self-sustaining.
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > 4.  You have no established working mechanisms or
> |  procedures for the
> |  > > > > > general
> |  > > > > > > membership
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Why bother, that would detract from the nominal
> |  importance of our Panel
> |  > > > > >Members...  BTW, Danny, have you perhaps heard anything
> |  from that champion
> |  > > > > >of the
> |  > > > > >common netizens, Satyajit Gupta?  I wonder if the other
> |  Panel Members
> |  > > > > >approve of
> |  > > > > >his delinquency?  If not, then why are there no steps
> |  being taken to
> |  > > > > >replace him?
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > 5.  You can't document any organizational outreach activities
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Well, you might have something there.  Perhaps Richard
> |  Henderson can fill
> |  > > > > >us in
> |  > > > > >on the progress towards the 100, 000 membership base he
> |  promised.
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > >
> |  > > > > > > After you get your own house in order, then feel
> |  free to question the
> |  > > > > > > relationship of ISOC chapters to ICANN -- they at
> |  least meet the minimum
> |  > > > > > > criteria expected for an at-large structure.
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Except for the fact that they are now a Registry
> |  operator, which puts them
> |  > > > > >in the
> |  > > > > >gTLD constituency...
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Seriously Disappointed,
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > > >
> |  > > > >
> |  >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> |  > > > > >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
> |  > > >
> |  > > >
> |  > > >
> |

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