>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 22:07:50 -0500 (EST)
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:    Non-member submission from [Don Heath
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]   

>To: Michael Sondow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Don Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: ISOC support for CORE/INTA Domain Name Support
>  Organization: Principles or Expediency?
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>At 05:36 PM 2/7/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
>>In your opinion, is it in keeping with ISOC's guiding principle of assuring
>>"the beneficial, open evolution of the global Internet" to create a Domain
>>Name Support Organization of ICANN that gives control of the domain space to
>>the trademarks lobby and the big businesses they represent? If not, why do
>>you permit ISOC's name to be used in support of the CORE/INTA DNSO
>>application?
>
>Michael
>
>No matter how hard you may try to cast the consensus proposal supported
>by ISOC as giving "control of the domain space to the trademarks lobby 
>and the big businesses they represent," in the end the reality of the
>consensus proposal won't change.  It is a very good proposal that was
>hammered out in an open process where many compromises were made in 
>order to get the broadest consensus.  The proposal most certainly has
>not given control to any specific group.
>
>I assure you that that process is still open to all who would be willing 
>to honestly work for a still broader consensus resolution.
>
>The group with a consistent narrow focus, the small collection of
>people driven by those claiming to be part of ORSC, seems to be quite
>unwilling to work with anyone but themselves.  Why?  If they are
>truly interested in consensus, I would think they would seriously
>be interested in working with a much broader spectrum of people.
>
>Don
>
-- 
The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  "It's all just marketing" +1 (613) 473-1719
Maitland House, Bannockburn, Ontario, CANADA, K0K 1Y0

Reply via email to