Re: [atlarge-discuss] Killing ICANNAtLarge by division

[Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>]

At 29.11.2002 11:53, Joop Teernstra wrote:
>Alexander,
>
>Political Websites are like cells.
>
>(At Large) Cells are not killed by division, they multiply by division. I have watched the attempts for central control since March and I can only conclude that  the time for division is overdue.
>There are too many diverging agenda's.

Joop, I don't mind diversity. I have been /constantly/
arguing for an At Large model which does not view one
organization as the monolithic one-size-fits-all model
which everyone should join. But if agendas diverge,
people should start *new* organizations at *new* domain
names. There are plenty of opportunities and free domains
to do so. There are even more opportunities to form
alliances between these groups. But they should *not* 
grab another organizations' membership lists and use a 
confusingly similar domain name just because they have
the control over that domain name. I may be and have been
critical of some former and current panel members, but 
they have actually been *elected*. Acting in coup d'état
mode does not particularly help *any* of the At Large 
efforts.

Unfortunately, Jefsey's icann-at-large.org adds even more
to this confusion. ("Hey, I'm part of the ICANNatlarge,
you know, the one without the slashes, but with the .org
ending. Or was it .net?")

>But as long as the divisions can co-operate and co-ordinate, division does not weaken us at all.  Power struggles do.

Amen.

>Alexander, why don't you want to co-operate and let the two sites work in tandem, like James is suggesting?

Again: If an organization is originally called ICANNatlarge.com,
then changes its name to ICANNatlarge.org, you should not
use the name/domain ICANNatlarge.com for a competing effort.
You are of course aware that the majority of the links that
led people to the original organization are now leading to
your site. Case in point: A Google search for link:icannatlarge.com
finds 1,580 sites; a search for link:icannatlarge.org finds none.

If you leave ICANNatlarge.org in anger and start a new group
called "Net Users At Large" or something like that, I would not
be disappointed. It's the abuse of control (over the domain name)
which is disappointing and deserves criticism. 

>Sure, I have not yet had the time to do anything but replicate the entire members' list, but your request to be removed formalizes a division into parties (rather than complimentary websites) more than anything else.

Your members' count should start at 1, like any other new
organization.

I still can't believe this is all happening because the web
forums you liked so much have been defaced and the panel didn't
see it as a priority to bring them back online. *sigh*

Best regards,
/// Alexander


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de