Carl and all, Good read Carl, my reading was essentially the same. I would submit that we can not thank Ken Stubbs for his purposefully misleading everyone to some degree. However this is not a ne or very reveling tactic/behavior of Ken's. He is nearly legendary for such practices as many of us have noted in the past on the gtld-Discuss list of old and the IAHC-Discuss list as well in the past on this list as well... I find this sort of purposeful practice the Ken Stubbs engages in frequently, apaulling, snide, and unproductive to meaningful discussion and this whole process. However it is his privilege to do so... Carl Oppedahl wrote: > At 03:25 PM 9/12/99 , Diane Cabell wrote: > > >The draft on my site is NOT THE PRODUCT OF THE ICANN/roberts APPOINTED > >COMMITTEE. > > > >Ken Stubbs submitted it and I understand that it is from the group of > >Registrars who produced the first Model policy that was posted on the > >ICANN site for the Santiago meetings. Haven't received a confirmation > >on that yet. Will post it when it arrives. > > I spent quite some time comparing two documents: > > The document entitled "ICANN Model Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy > for Voluntary Adoption by Registrars (Posted August 20, 1999)" posted on > ICANN's web site at > http://www.icann.org/santiago/registrar-dispute-policy.htm , > > and > > The document entitled "ICANN Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy - Draft - > This is not an official ICANN document -This is a DRAFT PROPOSAL dated > 9/9/99 - POLICY STATEMENT REGARDING THE MODEL DOMAIN NAME DISPUTE POLICY" > provided by Mr. Stubbs and posted on Ms. Cabell's web site at > http://www.mama-tech.com/udrp.html . > > Except as noted below, the two documents appear to be absolutely identical! > > For this reason, I am puzzled that there has been such a big fuss for the > last four days, with people (including me) wondering where Mr. Stubbs' > document came from, who drafted it, etc. Mr. Stubbs had wanted this > document posted someplace, asked Ellen Rony to do it, she declined, then he > asked Ms. Cabell to do it, she accepted. > > Now it appears that everybody could have been saved a lot of trouble if > four days ago Mr. Stubbs had simply said "Hey, everybody, let's all go back > and reread what was posted on the ICANN web site two weeks ago!" He could > have provided the URL and that would be the end of it. Instead, since > ICANN announced on August 26 that henceforth it will be doing the revising > of this policy, and since the September 9 posting said "ICANN" in the > title, everybody (including me) had to wonder whether September 9 document > was some sort of official or unofficial ICANN document. > > Now I said above that I would detail the differences between the August 20 > document and the September 9 document. As far as I can tell, the two draft > policies are the same, word for word except a few hyphenation artifacts. > But the September 9 document precedes the policy with five paragraphs of > introduction, and follows the policy with some Model Rules (they have been > appended twice, for reasons I don't understand). > > So we've had a tempest in a tea pot, it seems. The September 9 document > was some three weeks old and had already been posted elsewhere. Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!) CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Number: 972-447-1894 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
