All,
See: http://www.informationweek.com/795/privacy.htm
http://www.informationweek.com/795/privacy2.htm
http://www.informationweek.com/795/privacy3.htm
Intresting excerpts:
Such activities have turned online privacy into an explosive issue, one
that many companies may be
Joe and all,
As many have already witnessed starting in Singapore, ICANN is
already a failure in many respects. Some of which you point out here
nicely. Yokohama only emphasized this with the antics of several of the
ICANN Board members procedural maneuverings as well as
outlandish
Curtis and all,
Curtis you may not be aware of this but the complaint of which you
are making to ICANN Board members has been made many times
before, and gone ignored or not dealt with in any meaningful manner.
Relevant E-Mail lists are full of these complaints and concerns with
respect to the
Ben and all,
Thank you for pointing this out! I am cc'ing this to other relevant lists
for their review.
I did notice at
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/yokohama/archive/subcom-ga-071400.html
that of the 15 questions posed, not a single one was answered to my
knowledge. I wonder why
Joe and all,
Yes thank you Joe for sharing this with us. ;)
"Onward Christian Soldiers"
"In God we trust, in ICANN we wonder"
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
I want to thank brother Bob - for his pastorsforsoldiers.god
campaign. Today PCCF helped Bob and his Minitry reach out to
FYI,
-- Security Alert Consensus --
Number 053 (00.29)
Thursday, July 13, 2000
Created for you by
Network Computing and the SANS Institute
Relevant Info on BSD security bugs
Chris and all,
A proud sponser of ICANN in Yokohama, eh? Kinda
says it all Chris...
Christopher Ambler wrote:
Michael, you presume too much, both about Image Online
Design and myself.
I have no desire to argue with you, other than to say that
you're wrong about me.
Believe what you
Chris and all,
Very nicely done from about half of what I have read thus far
in my first reading.
Oh, you might also want to remove the following from your
home pag : " .WEB, The .WEB Internet Domain Registry, and The.WEB are
trademarks of Image Online Design, Inc. All rights reserved.",
Karl and all,
Yes I have been following this situation very closely as well
and can also confirm that at least the IRS has not accepted
ICANN as a 501(c)(3) status, and cannot really determine
at this juncture whether or not they should be granted
such a status.
Given the nature of ICANN as
Ron, Chris and all,
From a independent point of view we [INEGroup] see
IOD as in a battle for it's very existence. This would of course
include Chris Ambler. I have chided and disagreed with Chris
in the past and will likely do so again in the future, but his
response to ICANN seems, as I
Chris and all,
Ok, but they are not registered TM's at this time as you seem to
indicate. And you have 90 days in which to file an appeal I believe...
I would suggest that unless you have allot of NEW evidence you
do not file an appeal, as it will be denied abruptly.
Christopher Ambler
William and all,
First of all these lists, are not a court of law. As such I see
no reason why Michael needs or should present any evidence
of the nature that you are hereby requesting. Hence it would seem
reasonable that you are simply grandstanding at Michaels expense
for purposes that
James and all,
Well this is no small wonder here is it? It looks like the battle
for a .UNION gTLD has begun in earnest. I hope that the
Labor unions on a global scale will file a response to this letter.
James Love wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000
All,
Beyond dot-com? Troubled Net
group grapples with new names
Source: Associated Press
Publication date: 2000-07-09
See:
http://cnniw.yellowbrix.com/pages/cnniw/Story.nsp?story_id=11888365ID=cnniwscategory=Internet%3ARegulations
Some interesting excerpts of note:
"There really are people
Leah and all,
I believe that we are in complete agreement here wit respect to
the LPA letter to the ICANN Board and staff. It is indeed
insulting and IMHO wrong headed. Politically speaking it
could make some headway though as it is inherently negative
towards Unions. As you likely know,
Joe and all,
Joe, please add me as a signatory onto this letter. I hope you
have also sent it to some press folks too. If not please let me know
and I will be happy to do so for you if you like. This should be
published.
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Can you all look at this and make
Karl and all,
I think most of us know that Kent has a tendency to jump
the gun or provide his own spin on just about anything that
is not necessarily completely in ICANN's favor. This example
not withstanding of course...
Thank you for clarifying the specifics on the GAO report
for us all
Scott, Judith and all,
No, I think your posting this here is VERY appropriate. It would
even be more so had you posted this to the DNSO GA list. I would
suggest you do so, although I am sure that Harald and Roberto will
be somewhat displeased. ;)
Judith. Thank you for an very
Russ and all,
It seems obvious to me that Mattel believes it has right to all
speech related in any way to the term "Barbie". I find that to
be extraordinary and in disagreement in the extreme with the
1st amendment in several obvious areas. The part of your
web page, Trademarks.org that
Ellen and all,
Good suggestion and a practice I have used for some time now.
Unfortunately they (The ICANN Board) is not very responsive.
I would also suggest that you copy Becky Burr, Elliot Maxwell
and Andrew Pincus of DOC/NTIA as well.
Ellen Rony wrote:
Send these questions immediately to
Ellen and all,
Yes indeed. And it is too bad that ICANN doesn't enforce their
own policies upon their Registrars.
Ellen Rony wrote:
The Registrar Accreditation Agreement implies a prohibition against
warehousing of domain names:
http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-12may99.htm
Bill and all,
Hi, guys and gals:
I find in the following,
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la/archive/remotes-110299.html,
that I was a "remote participant" in an ICANN to-do. Sorry, but
I was not. Check it out and see how many others of you have had
your names used to pad the
All,
See: http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,37024,00.html
Could ICANN be next? Seems that with their relationship with
AOL and IBM that is a likely potential.
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA
All,
FYI. For your consideration. Please voice your opinion. If you
are not an ICANN At-Large or DNSO participant/member send
your opinions and comments to the DOC/NTIA or the members
of the ICANN Board directly. If any of you need assistance in
doing so, please E-Mail me privately I shall
...
Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
At 14:15 10.06.2000 -0400, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Note: At the moment, Jeff Williams is the only person barred from sending
to the list. Most other messages rejected by the list software either
comes
from nonsubscribers or violates the crossposting rule
Joe and all,
The only problem, and it is a big one, we have with .SEX or .XXX,
is that they will like be chartered, which I view as a good thin, but
than those business'slt related will only be allowed to register their DN's
in those name spaces. That is CENSORSHIP. An you know how I feel
All,
In a bit of follow-up it looks like this post (Bogus or contrived)
is attributed to ATTCanada from Netcom.ca IP address 207.181.79.54
and the owner of that IP address and the associsted block is as follows:
Netcom Canada Inc. (NETBLK-NETCOM-CA-BLK1)
905 King Street West
Joe and all,
Well sign me right up there, Joe! ;) Sounds like a good idea
and very interesting as well. I will forward your wisdom and information
on this class to our members so that they can join in as well
Maybe Esther Dyson will join in as well! ;) Remember Esther,
Red Latex
Joe and all,
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
Joe and all,
Well sign me right up there, Joe! ;) Sounds like a good idea
and very interesting as well. I will forward your wisdom and information
on this class to our members so that they can join
Joe and all,
How about a special .GOD domain for the ccTLD's?
blessedcctlds.god perhaps ;)
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
Hello Joe,
Tuesday, June 06, 2000, 12:52:09 PM, you wrote:
JB FYI: More ccTLD's say no to ICANN FEES
Good
Roeland and all,
That in part is why he (Dave Crocker) is known far and wide as
"The Crock". ROFLMAO!! "ad hominem police", that's good
Roeland. Is he the "Chief of the Internet mailing list ad hominem
police"?
I think this is a new title for Dave. Richard, you need to update your
link on
Joe and all,
As you know Joe, ICANN/DOC/NTIA is suppose to be doing oversight
to prevent these sorts of situations occurring. That oversight has not been
occurring as this article, amongst many others in the recent past have
reported.
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Network Solutions - ATTENTION
All,
For you speculators out there See:
http://cnniw.yellowbrix.com/pages/cnniw/Story.nsp?story_id=10760123ID=cnniwscategory=Internet%3ARegulations
Enjoy! ;)
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA
Joe and all,
How does Crispy-Songbird.god sound joe? ;) Oh yes, of course there
are no trailing "-'s"... Is that ok with you Louis or Mike?
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
As for Kent, well the bullshit flowith! Joe B. How about a
.G
to do so. And bill me on the total amount.
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Shall I register it in your name Jeff? Or in crispies name? Someone has
already register icann.god.
http://god.pccf.net/cgi-bin/whois.cgi?icann.god
Regards
Joe Baptista
On Thu, 18 May 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
Joe
Joe and all,
Ok thank you Joe. ;)
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
Joe and all,
Sure, that would be fine. Send me the bill. And than I will grant it
to either Kent or a worthy non-profit sunrise +20 supporter organization.
By the way does
wrote:
Sorry Jeff - forgot to address the rest of your question. I've been busy
with people sending in so many queries to dot.god.
On Thu, 18 May 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
By the way does Sunrise +20 work with your .GOD TLD as a policy
Joe?
That does not work with .GOD. Were
Joe and all,
The URL you are refrencing seems to mostly be dealing with
the good idea of .GOD TLD. Are you sure you have the right URL?
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/05/18/2346226
You can all consider the slashdot disscussions our contribution to the
Joe and all,
DOn't forget Joe that Ken was elected illegitimately as the history
of the DNSO clearly shows...
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Ken - your full of shit. Forgive me - but truth in advertising. Your a
names council exec - you should conduct yourself accordingly and not put
ICANN in
Michael and all,
I can't disagree with you proposed remedy here Michael. I
for one appreciate you frankness in this regard.
Michael Sondow wrote:
Jeff Williams wrote:
DOn't forget Joe that Ken was elected illegitimately as the history
of the DNSO clearly shows...
The DNSO
Richard and all,
I did some time ago now, and told the guy to bugger off. Than
hung up the phone on him and blocked his dial in number perminantly.
Richard J. Sexton wrote:
I got a few phone calls and emails from this fellow asking me to
remove all references to his name from the PAB
Joe and all,
This is a nice and truthful piece of journalism at least and at last.
Nice work Joe. May God be with you! ;)
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
http://www.internetnews.com/wd-news/article/0,2171,10_364761,00.html
Regards
Joe Baptista
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman
John the Repoman and all,
John, you have aptly captured in your own adept manner the
scam that ICANN has become to anyone that has half a brain,
and exercises it just a tad. ;) Maybe we should hang a label on
it as "ICANN-ISCAM"? Has a ring to it doesn't it? ;)
As for Kent, well the
All,
Just got these tonight:
Subject: Freedom?
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 02:26:31 EDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Those who give up a little freedom for a little security
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one"
--Thomas Jefferson
I
Linda and all,
I wonder how this could occur as stated in this announcement when
to my knowledge none of the applicants that applied for membership,
including myself, have received the information or anything sense
applying? Can you answer this for all of us please...
ICANN wrote:
ICANN
Patrick and all,
Patrick Corliss wrote:
Hi Jeff
On Wed 10 May 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
Patrick, you need to learn to turn wrap on in your E-Mailer or don't
sent your response as an attachment.
Patrick Corliss wrote:
Part 1.1 Type: Plain Text (text/plain
Patrick and all,
Patrick Corliss wrote:
Thank you, Jeff (Williams), that's cleared up a few points.
Well I am very glad it does! ;) I had hoped it would.
The reason I raised it was because of the post "Floating root servers and
stupid lawyer questions - was: Sunrise"
Richard and all,
Good point Richard. Most of us here know that WXW has had a long
standing feud with Jim Fleming dating back several years now. Indeed
that is unfortunate and basically unnecessary. But that is WXW's nature
or habit has been in dealing with several individuals including
Milton and all,
Thank you Milton for bringing this to our attention. I find it that
Bell Atlantic's action both tasteless and baseless from a legal
standpoint,
not to mention disgusting to boot. But of course we have been here
before, haven't we? :(
I hope that Mr. Emmanuel Goldstein can
John and all,
Areidiots.com and Areidiots.org are available. ;)
Yes you would THINK that Bell Atlantic and GTE would be
in position to know. But I have found over the past 10 years of so
that this is as likely not the case as it is... ;)
John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote:
Verizon is
Jay and all,
Yes, I have been contacted in regards to this investigation process
regarding ICANN, again...
Jay Fenello wrote:
The New York Times Scoops the Rest (again)!
FYI:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/05/cyber/capital/02capital.html
Congressional Investigators Scrutinize
Karl and all,
Indeed I am sorry that you take such offense at my attempting to
keep interested parties informed. I also see that you have a tendency
to contradict your self in your response. I also noticed that in your
response you also cross posted. As I recall you, Andy, William
and even
Joe and all,
We at INEGroup would have to agree with Ross on this very
strongly. As you may know, Milton Muler has sent to the NCDNHC
list a solicited response to the IP constituency's and Michael Palage,
so called "Sunrise Proposal" .
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
I don't know if this has
Joe and all,
I also have to agree with both your potential scenario and Dave
Crockers comments here as well. But I somehow doubt that
China will in the end block all gTLD (DNS Entirely) and will
modify their tendency for pull business practices to some expectable
level, eventually or risk
All,
Interesting FYI, see:
http://cnniw.yellowbrix.com/pages/cnniw/Story.nsp?story_id=9858023ID=cnniwscategory=Internet%3ARegulations
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information
All,
More interesting news, though not so new to most of us here, but
yet spreading the word on ICANN and Domain Names..
See:
http://cnniw.yellowbrix.com/pages/cnniw/Story.nsp?story_id=9857077ID=cnniwscategory=Internet%3ARegulations
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k
in the public domain. So here's a
copy of the full message. Poor WXW is seeing ghosts again.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 00:17:01 -0700
From: Jeff Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Mo McKinlay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL
Richard and all,
Richard Sexton asks some very good questions here that need,
and even demand good answers. Our organization has some views
on these questions that we believe are relevant as well as very
important now and more so in the future
Richard J. Sexton wrote:
(Never meta
William and all,
For some of you who may be new on this list. William X. Walsh
has had a long standing dislike and feud with Joe Baptista, as well
as myself amongst a few others. Anything that WXW may say in
response to posts coming from Joe, myself, Joop, and a few others
should be read
All,
FYI for information on existing additional TLD's:
===
Subject:
Re: [ga] About GA membership again..
Date:
Sun, 02 Apr 2000 15:23:49 -0700
From:
Jeff Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization
Mikael and all assembly members,
Do you have a URL for the IDG article? If so, would you share
it with us? I must have somehow missed it.
Mikael Pawlo wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Michael Sondow wrote:
The Swedish government will on Monday release a report suggesting new
rules for
Joe and all,
ROFLMAO! Seems like a typical day for the IETF to me! ;)
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
A slow day at the IETF ;-)
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 16:02:43 -0800
From: RFC Editor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: IETF-Announce: ;
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Louis and all other interested parties,
Louis, you are full of it buddy. I nearly fell out of my chair
laughing when I read this nonsense Get a grip fella, will ya!
ICANN, INC. wrote:
*** Attention ***
It's that time again!
As many of you know, each leap year the Internet must
Michael and all,
Good tongue and cheek post here Michael. I also echo Michaels
joust here Becky. Yours and the NTIA's oversight with ICANN has
been and continues to be the poorest example of oversight from any
organization I believe I have ever seen in my entire life to date. Had
either of
Jay and all assembly members,
First let me say this should not really be on the DNSO GA list...
More comments below as to the subject
Jay Fenello wrote:
At 07:49 PM 3/15/00 , David R. Conrad wrote:
Michael,
I know it's in the interests of IBM, MCI, ATT to put small
companies
Mike and all,
I would agree that collaboration vs confrontation would be the PREFERRED
approach, Mike. But sometimes that is not always possible and unrealistic
as well. As for David Conrad, we differ greatly in that regard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with David Conrad. And
David and all,
David R. Conrad wrote:
Richard,
Would I be wrong then in taking your positon to be "IP addresses should
be managed by a technical process, while domain names should be managed
by a political process"?
I do not necessarily feel political processes are the best mechanism
All,
Considering CORE's once fearless and renowned leader Ken "Stubby" Stubbs,
it is hardly surprising that COREland is an unhappy place and it's registrars
are jumping ship. Now of course we have "Stubby" on the DNSO NC.
William X. Walsh wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash:
Ken and all,
And this "Procedure" is wholly insufficient as well as dangerous to the
Registrant. But given the source of this "Procedure" I am not at all
surprised, "Stubby"... By the way, how is the "Cold Calling" going
there "Stubby"? ;)
Ken Stubbs wrote:
core has a policy for
Ed and all,
I made a very similar argument some months ago now, and it too fell
on deaf ears. What is even more amazing is that the DOC/NTIA
let's this slide! To me that is utterly amazing, and displays their utter
disdain for the Registrant and nearly complete ignorance
Ed Gerck wrote:
Ellen and all,
I agree that the ICANN @Large seems to be a very weak process.
This is of course indicative of the ICANN board. It has been very weak
on process, thus producing very poor substance in many instances. The
UDRP and the "Accreditation Policy" is just two past examples.
Nominees
Ron and all,
I haven't. Neither has any of our members that have joined. I was
wondering when
this would occur as well... Anyone else received one??
Ron Bennett wrote:
Has anyone received their ICANN PIN yet??
Ron Bennett
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k
All,
Another ICANN clone is offering Domain Name registration...
See:
http://cnniw.newsreal.com/cgi-bin/NewsService?osform_template=pages/cnniwStoryID=cnniwstorypath=News/Story_2000_03_09.NRdb@2@14@3@106path=News/Category.NRdb@2@17
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k
All
ICANN seems to wish to clone previous effort on new gTLD's
of the defunct IAHC/CORE...
see:
http://cnniw.newsreal.com/cgi-bin/NewsService?osform_template=pages/cnniwStoryID=cnniwstorypath=News/Story_2000_03_09.NRdb@2@20@3@38path=News/Category.NRdb@2@17@2@11
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
are working hard to encourage a more
responsive, accountable election and governance process.
--Nancy Kranich
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 16:13:25 -0800
From: Jeff Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:[EMAIL
Joe and all,
There is not good reason that Antony Van Couvering should be "Shocked"
if he has been paying attention, which it appears he has not. Of course
this is indicative of the ICANN board in general.
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Fortune 500 ripe for cybersquatters
More than half of
All,
See:
http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article/0,1087,4_315131,00.html
Very interesting...
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail
Joe and all,
I don't know whom this "Bill Jeffries" person is, but he is using a
free E-Mail account from USA.COM yet he provides no SIG file
giving any indication as to whom he may be or what affiliation(s)
he may have. I also find no listing for him anywhere with that E-Mail
address. GIven
all live under, and I am all for it! ;) So please join right in! ;)
William X. Walsh wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02-Mar-2000 Jeff Williams wrote:
Joe and all,
I don't know whom this "Bill Jeffries" person is, but he is using a
free E-Mail ac
Joe and all,
In this instance Mr. Diaz has a good reason to be unhappy.
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
an unhappy customer.
On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Vin Diaz wrote:
Here's a horror story I wish had never happened. Everybody who uses the
CRYPT-PW auth scheme with Network Solutions please read:
Joe and all IDNO'ers,
Yes little WXW is a bit of a stinker isn't he. As well is his friend and
fellow compatriot Andrew. Those poor lads!
Besides this maliciousness I still think that is is always better to turn a
negative into a positive. I am sorry however that you are declining the
Gordon and all,
Let' just say she doesn't have her facts right. I smell a rat here by
the name of ogolvie...
Gordon Cook wrote:
Ms. Simons is very plainly muddle headed.
Barbara Simons wrote:
Dear Michael,
I infer from your note that you approve of my article
on government
All,
FYI,
See:
http://cnniw.newsreal.com/cgi-bin/NewsService?osform_template=pages/cnniwStoryID=cnniwstorypath=News/Story_2000_02_23.NRdb@2@3@3@38path=News/Category.NRdb@2@17@2@11
Well at least I told them so!
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
Michael, Ms Kranich and all,
I also would like to know the answers to these questions as well.
Thank you Ms Kranich for your cooperation in advance.
Dear Ms. Kranich-
According to the FAIR announcement below, you are leading a
discussion tomorrow evening on "How To Fight the Corporate
Richard and all,
I don't know that it is any of Mr. Pawlo's business as to how ICIIU
is funded, unless he is a member. I think Mr. Pawlo is just off on one
of his tangents in an attempt to discredit the ICIIU. He must have
forgotten to take his medication today. Maybe he needs another
Dan and all,
For some I would immagine it would take lots of dinero, $$, cash,
scratch, bucks, ect, ect
Dan Steinberg wrote:
So what does it take to become a member, Richard?
Mikael Pawlo wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
Dear Friends,
I've tried to find
John and all,
It is very difficult to see the WHOLE story on how ICANN is funded
as well Wonder why that is? Seems the EU is also very interested
in the ICANN's funding story as well
John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote:
You have to promise not to tell anyone that the ICIIU and Vrx
John and all,
Yes, curiosity is a interesting thing. It is why it is said cats have nine
lives ;)
John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote:
If you call yourself "International Congress of Independent Internet
Users" and an independent user asks about funding and membership you
should be
Joe and all,
ROFLMAO! Very appropriate and to the point precisely Joe.
Well done!
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:
Someone who knows I am preparing to add some material about Mr Sondow
and his
one man International Congress of Independent Internet
Joe and all,
From my information Mr. Gobrachov, has a substantial financial
trust that has holding in NSOL! Smart move on his part. As to
take over rumors, well I think that might be premature! ;)
!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
There's only one
Joe and all,
Agreed to a point. The software that they are using is from Duke University
called "Web Board". Not very easy to use as a standard Mailing list is
much better. I have informed Diane Cambell of that short coming. I also
noticed that very few if any are participating. I think
Andy and all,
Great piece here andy, and right on the money, so to speak! ;)
Andy Oram wrote:
http://webreview.com/wr/pub/2000/02/18/platform/index.html
[65]Platform Independent
All,
FYI,
See:
http://cnniw.newsreal.com/cgi-bin/NewsService?osform_template=pages/cnniwStoryID=cnniwstorypath=News/Story_2000_02_18.NRdb@2@16@3@683path=News/Category.NRdb@2@17@2@11
I wonder how long it will be before ICANN yanks them out of their
roots or
a law suit issues as a result
All,
A more reasoned article on the DOT.COM's hacking each other.
Who's next? Well if your security is weak, like the DNSO's or ICANN's
it might be you!
See: http://www.theregister.co.uk/000218-18.html
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
Joe and all,
Harald has a very great tendency to make false accusations, this is well
documented in the DNSO Archives several entries of which I Have already
made reference to before. As you know Joe, and as do those on this DNSO
list that remain, also know Harald in not in an ICANN Official
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
Joe K. , Joe and all,
I think that membership dues is a great idea. For the DNSO and ICANN
they need to be as high as possible to keep the "Little People" out, at least
$5k per year minimum. Than Joe Kelsey and William will hav
to focus on Gato, and a
well desearved - although short two week vacation from the GA looney
toons.
Regards
Joe Baptista
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
Joe and all,
Not to worry there are ways around Haralds little childish games.
Of course you know some of them yourself
2000, Jeff Williams wrote:
Joe and all,
ROFLMAO! Well yes our little boy William needed his butt spanked
and I hope it has taught him a lesson, though I doubt it. They turned
on him like a rabid dog, didn't they? But still in principal what Roberto
and Harald is doing is wrong. I
Joe and all,
I must say that ICANN has indeed showed it's posterior on more than
one occasion. And the DNSO debacle is it's biggest eye sore of late and
getting worse. 3 more assembly members not including Roeland have
left in utter disgust today and one moved to the digest list instead of
David and all,
Yes and this concern has been expressed to the NTIA and the DOJ
on several occasions, with nothing but disrespect as a retort from Becky
Burr. I find that extraordinary and our of line entirely.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe and everyone,
It looks like we have another
1 - 100 of 1851 matches
Mail list logo
