Hello: Recently I have had the opportunity to reply to an individual who wants to remain anonymous concerning our activities and position as they relate to ICANN, DNSO, the IDNO and any other group. Details of this email have been censored, but the gist of it is there. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 07:57:10 -0400 (EDT) From: J. Baptista <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Some semi sage advice You raise alot of interesting points which I shall address. On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, [CENSORED] wrote: > As a silent observer of this group and other forums I have seen your posts and > interaction with [CENSORED]. > > I just wanted to give you a heads up that you are in the wrong forum for > attacking him. He carries a lot of respect in the idno.org membership, and a > lot of that is supportive of the types of activity you criticize him about, > including the whole [CENSORED] thing. They see his work debunking > [CENSORED] as positive and useful. That in my books qualifies as a complete waste of time. I keep mentioning to the various groups that PCCF is sponsored to be here. There's a reason why I say that. Simply put we are paid to tolerate the insanity. Whatever respect the individuals have in the idno is of no consequence to us. The issue reflects strictly on the idno and the combined membership. I will address this further a bit later. > I see a lot of what you have to say here as useful and productive, but > continuing to battle with [CENSORED] will only earn you contempt in this > group, and make your efforts futile. You will get no sympathy defending > [CENSORED], or attacking [CENSORED] publicly. Both of these actions will > cause this group to label you appropriately. And I know you publicly > state you don't care about such things, but in this group you probably > should. I appreciate your concern, but it's not really that important. As I have said in public, PCCF does not take issue nor concern itself with public opinion, especially here. The only exclusion is if the comment came from "Someone of importance", in which case were more then happy to make hay of it. If we look at the DNS cloud of groups (i.e. IDNO, DNSO, IRSC, ORSC etc. etc.) and ask ourselves the question "Is there a diamond in all this dung", our answer at PCCF is "no, just rough diamonds". In other words, these groups have the potential to be what were looking for, but they are all far from achiving the goal. In the case of the IDNO, they only have some 100 to 200 members. It's a good start, but in the world of politics that number is so close to nothing as to make no odds. The same applies to any other group. No one, including the appointed ICANN and DNSO, has any number of consequence which impress us, nor do these numbers rationalize the right to power or control. We recognized this problem existed three years ago. As I have said before, PCCF's only claim to fame is recognizing this and doing something about it. With the assistance of our sponsor, we purchased alot of computers and went out and mapped 60-70% of the internet representing 110,000 dns administrators. These are the only people we consider important, in that they run the world's dns. Now I would like to revisit the concept of reputation. As I have said, it is of little imporance to us. At PCCF we have always believed there are two specific means in the human program to gain a reputation. The most common is the time honoured process of "brown nosing". The other method is by "action". At PCCF we believe in gaining our reputations based on our actions. It's the only way to go. Now, regardless of the sillyness and bad behaviour we have found in the conferences, it is our intention to include everyone in our process and make available these resources to any group that can show they have the means of delivering services to these 110,000 people. My only advise here is to the groups involved, including the IDNO. I suggest everyone pull up their pants, slap on some makeup, and be as presentable as is possible so as to make a good impression. In the final analysis our reputation will not be on the line. However, the reputation of every group here and individual claiming status will be subject to review by the people who are important to the process. My only hope is that the groups here will be presentable by October. If not you'll all loose your rights to governance very quickly. As for a response to the baiting comments you made. We know that and it's all part of the game and again of no consequence to us. I will be posting this information publically and will make changes to it to protect you. It's imporant that we share our position on this yet again to make sure everyone is clear on the subject. Cheers Joe Baptista -- Planet Communication & Computing Facility [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public Access Internet Research Publisher 1 (212) 894-3704 ext. 1033
