Wait, I'm not following you. In September of 1998 Mueller impliedly called Sondow a liar (the quote is reproduced below). When you say that people change, did Sondow change because he was a liar in September and not now in May, or has Mueller changed because he can now work with liars if it leads to a position on the Names Council? I'll believe in the altruistic nature of the Mueller/Sondow alliance when they both publicly disavow any leadership postion whatsoever in DNSO. Until that time, I remind you that politics makes strange bedfellows. >I know that there has been plenty of postings on this subject later in >the day but I really could n let this one go by. > >Are you saying that people can't change or people cannot/should not >change their opinions of people over time? >That's a scary thought. >Rather I thing we should be applauding Milton Mueller and Michael >Sondow for their ability to find compromise and work together towards >a common goal. The ability to compromise is something that has been >sorely missing from this process. > >And I leave you all with a final thought: If you believe everything >Marty says, think of what would be required for Milton to go to such >lengths. The alternative must b truly horrendous. >G'night all. I've had a long day. > >"Martin B. Schwimmer" wrote: >> >> And when Cooper Union canceled its DNS conference in September of last >> year, was that because Sondow was a newbie, or were they afraid he was a >> potentially violent nutjob? >> >> This is what his ally of the moment, Milton Mueller, wrote to this list on >> Sept 22, after Sondow unilaterally cancelled the event: >> >> "For reasons that I am not privy to, Mr. Sondow has chosen to >> disassociate himself from the event. That he is now claiming that >> the event is cancelled gives you some idea of his tactics." >> >> So we see the depth and sincerity of Cook's and Mueller's alliance with >> Sondow. >> >> Paul Garrin wrote that day: >> >> "It seems that Mr. Sondow has taken it upon himself to sabotage >> and then cancel the event at Cooper Union. Everything was >> arranged and all parties, to my knowledge were prepared to >> fulfill their contributions to the event. >> >> Mr. Sondow, for inexplicable reasons, perhaps suffering >> fatigue or mental breakdown, suddenly became distraught >> and began to make threatening telephone calls to the staff >> at Cooper Union, including the President and Vice President, >> asserting that he (Mr. Sondow) would physically disrupt the >> event should it proceed as planned, as well as flood the >> internet with discrediting messages about Cooper Union, >> the DNS.Forum event, and persons connected to the event, >> including myself. >> >> Given the lack of clear credibility of Mr. Sondow, and his >> apparent "one-man organization", so-called "ICIIU", it is >> no great loss that Mr. Sondow has disassociated himself from >> the event. Apparently, he was upset that the credit was >> being shared by all the contributing organizations involved >> in the event, and threw a tantrum at the last minute and >> decided to unilaterally cancel the event on what appeared >> to be a self-indulgent, capricious whim." >> >> Frankly, it is evidence of the absurdity of this process that Sondow's >> status as a representative of anyone other than himself is seriously >> debated for more than a millisecond. >> >> Now before there is an attempt to distract the list's attention with >> unfounded accusations about my affiliations, I note that I am not employed >> by or paid by or represent anyone jockeying for position for control of the >> non-commercial constituency, and I don't really care who wins out. I did >> pay my $35 to join the Internet Society but I only did so to meet women >> (film fans will appreciate that reference to Zero Mostel's line in "The >> Front" when explaining why he attended communist meetings in the '30's - >> the McCarthyism reference seems appropriate here). >> >> Professor Froomkin used the term "purloined letter" when referring to the >> WIPO report. >> >> The "purloined letter" technique may be better applied to those who >> selected the Interim Board. >> >> Attention paid to Sondow is attention diverted from a more important issue: >> why is there a process which allows this farce where we spend so much time >> paying attention to Sondow? >> >> Who benefits? >> >> p.s. I stopped writing to Sondow because in response to my question "how >> could you possibly know what I am thinking?" he wrote back to say that he >> could read my mind. While I believe that he meant that metaphorically and >> not schizophrenically, that type of remark illustrates why he is utterly >> inappropriate for any consensus-oriented entity, and why if someone wanted >> to perpetuate the status quo and exert power behind the scene, yet retain >> the illusion of democracy, they would "delegate" authority to a "consensus >> manager." >> >> At 06:28 PM 6/2/99 -0400, you wrote: >> >Martin B. Schwimmer a �crit: >> > >> >> In a series of posts on September 27, 1998, Gordon Cook posted >>publicly the >> >> following remarks directed at Sondow: >> >> >> >> "you are hardly the most welcome person on this list. I advise you >>to take >> >> your personal attacks to private mail." >> >> >> >> and >> >> >> >> "gee just when sondow had shown some signs of maturity, he throws another >> >> lovely tantrum......." >> > >> >Ah, Mr. Schwimmer, you have been lying in wait all this time to get >> >even with me for besting you in the debates subsequent to the >> >Monterrey DNSO.org conference. >> > >> >It's true, when I first began posting on these lists I was subject >> >to flaming and, having a passionate nature, responded in kind, >> >which, from a newbie, was not taken well. But I have since paid my >> >dues, as they say, and have found common ground with those, like >> >Gordon Cook, who are fighting for justice and freedom on the >> >Internet. I only wish that you were one of them. >> > >> > > >-- >Dan Steinberg > >SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology >35, du Ravin >Box 532, RR1 phone: (613) 794-5356 >Chelsea, Quebec fax: (819) 827-4398 >J0X 1N0 e-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
