Thank you for your response. U.S. Federal laws require that
such discussions be held in open forums. As a individual from
the .EDU community, I am not sure what your interest would
be, but everyone is welcome to their opinion.

Jim Fleming
http://www.DOT-BIZ.com
http://www.in-addr.info
3:219 INFO


----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Massey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jim Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Enum] (no subject)


> | [EMAIL PROTECTED] dropped from this thread
>
> You posted to the ietf list so I assume you want some feedback from
> the thousands of people like me who read the list.
>
> First, you are asking for the disclosure of "widely reported"
> information.  Think about the logic of that for minute.
> I'm not sure what you mean by disclose, but my dictionary says:
>   disclose: To make known something heretofore kept secret.
>
> Second, why should I care about Tony and Dave's employment
> history?  It is true that IETF topics have commercial implications,
> but the technical merit of an idea is not related to how it impacts
> the foo.com business plan.  Stick to the technical content and
> discuss corporate agendas elsewhere.  I don't see any technical
> point here that warrants the attention of the entire IETF.
>
> Dan
>
> Jim Fleming wrote:
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > Do you think it is ethical for people to not disclose who is paying them
> > and what their real agenda is ?
> >
> > It is widely reported that you are paid by Neustar, Neulevel, ICANN,
> > and/or MCI/Worldcom (i.e. Vinton Cerf).
> >
> > Will you be disclosing who has paid you all these years to participate
> > in discussions as if you are a neutral party ?
> >

Reply via email to