>On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
>>
>> On 10-Feb-99 Mike Roberts wrote:
>> > With respect to the rest of the email, you present a compelling
>> > case for your vision of the future of the Internet name and
>> > address system. However, it is your case and your opinion,
>> > to which you are richly entitled in our democracy. Others
>> > may have other views and reach other conclusions.
who are these others, and why can't their conclusions stand the light of
day? you assume that you have the god given right to be the only one to
hear them.
It seems
>> > to me to be unreasonable for you to conclude, with a lot of
>> > value laden adjectives, that those who may disagree with you
>> > are less worthy of having their opinions heard in the councils
>> > and public processes of ICANN. Gordon and others have been
>> > critical of the SJ Mercury article quotation in which I said
>> > that critics of ICANN needed to distinguish between being heard
>> > and having their way. This is the essence of the kind of
>> > republican democracy we have in the United States.
Patrick greenwell:
>
>Another important compenent of a republican democracy is that we elect the
>officials that are to serve our interests.
>
>Who elected you to serve?
>
>
Gordon Cook: Bill and Pat make very sound points. lets bring up another
issue Mike -- **authority**
This is not the military nor even the Navy. The mind set in your comment
above is military.... someone handed you the sword of command. You assume
that authority over the rest of the net went with it.
That is a mistaken assumption. right now ICANN has zero authority and when
an entity with no authority starts pushing its weight around, that gives
everyone problems. Where to you think your "authority" comes from? jon
postel? did Jon appoint you his heir?
there is another small point in this nations history.
Icann has just announced a taxation plan that looks pretty open ended. Only
problem is I don't see any representation.
Icann will likely not have a protocols SO proposal anytime soon. Nor will
it have an Address SO proposal anytime soon. Those systems are in place as
John Curran pointed out in Reston... they are functioning very well thank
you with out ICANN.
That leaves domain names. It would be wonderfuilly ironic if your style
Mike led the contending factions to coalesce around the Paris proposal and
brought their own proposal to commerce for approval. where would ICANN be
then. You are asking for millions a year to impose your will on the rest
of the net. what makes you think you are entitled to it?
***************************************************************************
The COOK Report on Internet 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA
(609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cookreport.com
NOTE: Contempt in which ICANN PRES. MIKE ROBERTS holds rest of Internet:
"Some of those people think the management [ICANN] should check with the
public [the Communities of the Internet] every time they make a decision,
which is crazy," Roberts said. "That's flat-out crazy." WIRED NEWS 2/4/99
***************************************************************************
