Bullocks.
Just because the ISOC does things also which are non commercial
doesn't take away from the fact that most of the advocacy it does in
this process is on behalf of COMMERCIAL organizations.
What is nonsense is that you would even expect anyone to believe
otherwise.
On Mon, 31 May 1999 22:13:52 -0700, Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 02:27:29AM +0000, William X. Walsh wrote:
>[...]
>>
>> 2) Organizations who predominately represent the interests of
>> commercial organizations. (This excludes the ISOC).
>
>This is false. ISOC does not by any means "primarily represent the
>interests of commercial organizations". It has on the order of 200
>organizational members (not all of them commercial), and over 6000
>individual members. If anything, ISOC should be said to represent
>the interests of individuals.
>
>Here, for example, is a recent message from Don Heath on
>isoc-members-discuss:
>
>>At 08:45 AM 5/27/99 +0200, David Nordfors wrote:
>>>Hi!
>>> I read in a press release from Apple that the ISOC is supporting
>>> humanitarian work in Kosovo. Perhaps somebody has answers or comments
>>> to Anders' questions?
>>
>>Check out http://www.kosovonet.org which ISOC and the Poniecki Foundation
>>are doing. >
>>Don
>
>> Commercial interests supporting the ICIIU are doing so for the purpose
>> of trying to present a united front against the ISOC,
>
>This is utter nonsense.
--
William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Fax:(209) 671-7934
The Law is not your mommy or daddy to go
crying to every time you have something
to whimper about.
