"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 02:03 AM 5/21/99 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>> On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 11:57:34PM -0800, Ellen Rony wrote:
>>> After a summer of international meetings in 1998, people believed that the
>>> selection of the interim NewCo board would be made by a PUBLIC process.
>> Some truly naive people may have believed that. The political
>> realities were that the people would have to be hand-selected, however.
What political realities, out of curiosity?
>> I *guarantee* you that there would be *far* greater public
>> recalcitrance to accept the authority of a board elected by this
>> list.
> How can you guarentee this. What do you know the rest of us don't?
Just as an observation, if I were Becky Burr, Elliott Maxwell, etc.,
getting reams of emails with long distributions, consisting of nearly
all included text except for accusations that such-and-such person
does not exist, has embezzled funds from their company, etc., I would
have problems taking the list seriously, if I were indeed reading the
list at all. I imagine they are very busy, and do not have time to
read endless amounts of flames. Not to say that everything on the
list is like this, but there is enough of it that would potentially
cause them to tune out.
If this is the case, this is bad for the IFWP process (and email in
particular as a step towards participatory online Internet
governance), if it actually could have had more of an impact on
ICANN.
--gregbo
