Joe,
Can you do .g-d for those of us who might care to use it?
(Couldn't say for sure, but Jewish people I know - myself included - write
G-d, sort of a "don't say the name in vain" thing ...)
??
Judith
800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Consulting � FREE Daily HeadsUp Headlines.
"...superb real-time source..." �� "...invaluable..." ��
"...indispensable..."
http://ICBTollFree.com �� http://1800TheExpert.com �� (U.S.) 1 800 The
Expert
Judith Oppenheimer �� mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] �� +1 212
684-7210
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2000 10:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IFWP_LIST V1 #804
IFWP_LIST Monday, May 15 2000 Volume 01 : Number 804
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 13:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Greg Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [IFWP] Re: [domain-policy] charter vs. generic
Richard Sexton wrote:
>I'm not sure it's possible to enfore a charter based on semantics; the
>ony chartered TLDs that have been even moderately successful are those
>which limit the charter to a specifit (or specific type) or organization.
>Do we care? Say .per and .nom were for personal names and sombody
regosetrers
>their name and decide they want to run a porn site as well as use the name
>for personal email. Who are we to say you can't do this.
While I personally have no objections, I imagine there could be some
raised eyebrows if (hypothetically) Peter Playboy decides to start up
a porn magazine at playboy.nom.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 20:55:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: "!Dr. Joe Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [IFWP] Re: Sunset for sunrise
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Patrick Corliss wrote:
> NOW can you see what sends Dr Joe Baptista into a rage? The lawyer
>side has
I'm sorry I gave you that impression. I guess it's my naturally abrassive
personality which may have caused that impression. In fact I find this
whole sunshine crap somewhat useful in promoting anti ICANN activities.
My main concern is that were wasting too much time discussing it. We've
all put forth our views and from what I can see we all agree the stupid
lawyer tricks amount to nothing more then garbage.
I'm also concerned that this is nothing more nor less then pro ICANN
lawyers and pro ICANNER's like the crispy twins attempting to generate
consensus so ICANN can later tell the world there was a great deal of
discussion when in fact this issue was dumped like the plague some time
ago.
Michael (whatshisname) the lawyer rarely enters this discussion forum, and
the crispy twins are the same. The only time they grace us with their
love is when they need consensus for upcoming ICANN meetings and then they
troll the various groups soliciting it.
I've gotten three unsolicited emails this month alone asking me to
participate in this sillyness. I tell them all I'm an original signatory
and supporter of the Sexton - Berryhill response - which see
http://sunrise.open-rsc.org/see_it/
and if you want to support it too - you can visit
http://sunrise.open-rsc.org/sign_it/
The lack of participation in the sunsine debate is making ICANN nervous -
especially with the GAO looking at them in the raw these days.
Normally these discussions were carried on the DNSO GA list, but that
list for all intent and purposes is dead. And I take great pleasure and
credit for being a primary party responsible for killing it. The GA was
always a farce - in keeping with ICANN tradition. Unfortunately - now
that the ICANNER's have showed their hand and fell into the censorship
trap which killed the GA - they now have to troll around gathering
consent.
Regards
Joe Baptista
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 01:23:20 -0400
From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [IFWP] FINANCING PLANET MANAGEMENT
Here's another article that was
sent in response to "An Internet
Awakening."
FYI:
Jay.
1. Financing Planet Management: Sovereignty, World Order and the Earth
Rights Imperative, Published by the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, New
York, January 1994, 2nd edition printing, 1995.
Financing Planet Management: Sovereignty, World Order and the Earth
Rights Imperative -- By Alanna Hartzok
"We have reached the deplorable circumstance where in large measure a very=
=20
powerful few are in possession of the earth's resources, the land and all=20
its riches, and all the franchises and other privileges that yield a=20
return. These monopolistic positions are kept by a handful of men who are=20
maintained virtually without taxation . . . we are yielding up sovereignty."
- Agnes de Mille (1905-1993)
FINANCING PLANET MANAGEMENT
"Heaven has its reasons, Earth has its resources, Man has his political=20
order, thus forming with the first two a triad. But he would err if he=20
failed to respect the ground rules of this triad and infringed on the other=
=20
two."
- Xun Quang Xunzi, 3rd c. BC
Defining the parameters of sovereignty is a key component of the world
order dialogue as it struggles to reach consensus regarding the
boundaries and prerogatives of power.
Sovereignty is the status of a person or group of persons having supreme
and independent political authority. In dealing with the concept of
sovereignty, we are dealing with the reality of power. It is a power
over territory, over land and water, oil and minerals, as well as those
life forms which have miraculously emerged out of the mud of the earth.
The kings and queens of Europe, Africa, and Asia were sovereigns. They
reigned supreme and were thought to be divine. They descended from those
having the strongest might and force to prevail over territory. The
larger and richer the territory they could hold under their power and
authority, the higher their status. They were both feared and courted by
other humans.
These were the dominators who ruled the land and made the rules. Their
rules became law. Their territorial law was that of "dominium" -- the
legalization of control over lands originally obtained by conquest and
plunder. All real estate was the royal estate. Might made right, as the
rules of power became the laws of the land.
Peter Hansen, executive director of the Independet Commission on Global
Governance, has stated that the "United Nations cannot by the nature of
things, have the formal attributes of sovereignty, which has been
defined around a territory, around a (specific) population, because
centralized control of a sovereign body with a given territory and
population, is not the same thing as a sovereign U.N. To assume that it
would be is not a very meaningful way, in my opinion, to define the
subject." -- World Peace News, November 1993
But it seems to me that the U.N. has in fact been defined around a given
territory, that territory being the planet as a whole, as well as a
specific population, which is all the planet's people. The issue here is
not that of populations and boundary lines, but of the demarcation of
power and control over the earth that is the foremost "formal attribute
of sovereignty" to be debated.
To speak of enforceable world law is to speak of world power. A world
legislature would have the power to make the laws of the land and to
make the rules for the territory of the earth. And this is what concerns
me, because we have not yet discussed the rules of territorial control
and ownership in sufficient detail.
Consider these realities:
Fact: A U.N. study of 83 countries showed that less than 5% of
rural landowners control three-quarters of the land.
Fact: The most pressing cause of the abject poverty which
millions of people in the world endure is that a mere 2.5% of landowners
with more than 100 hectares control nearly three-quarters of all the
land in the world, with the top 0.23% controlling over half. (Susan
George, How the Other Half Dies, Penguin Books,1976, p.24)
Fact: At best, a generous interpretation would suggest that about
3% of the population owns 95% of the privately held land in the U.S.
(Peter Meyer, Land Rush-A Survey of America's Land - Who Owns It, Who
Controls It, How Much Is Left; Harpers Magazine, Jan.l979)
Fact: According to a 1985 government report, 2% of landowners
hold 60% of the arable land in Brazil while close to 70% of rural
households have little or none. Just 342 farm properties in Brazil cover
183,397 square miles--an area larger than California. (Worldwatch Oct.
l988)
Before a global authority, be it a reformed United Nations or a federal
world government, can be trusted to wield power benignly, the problem of
the current undemocratic control of the earth must be addressed.
Innumerable battles and wars have been fought, and many are currently in
progress, over territorial control. The fair and peaceful resolution of
such conflicts requires a deep consideration of ethical principles
regarding land tenure.
Dr. I.G. Patel, Independent Commission on Global Governance member,
governor of the Reserve Bank of India, and former director of the London
School of Economics stated that "We cannot talk (sensibly) about what
kind of global government we want until (1) agreement is reached on how
to deal with the causes of international problems and (2) if we are
going to have governance or government we will have to do something
about poverty." --World Peace News, Nov. l993
Dr. Patel is correct in his perception that the world order movement has
not dealt sufficiently with these issues. While there is a fair amount
of unanimity regarding the basic outline of a democratic global
political structure, i.e., the need for a democratically elected
legislature, a world judiciary to interpret and apply world laws, and an
executive to administer and enforce the laws, there has not
yet been sufficient thought applied to the consideration of root causes
of poverty and international conflict.
The problem is that democracy has not "grounded" itself. We have not yet
extended democratic principles down to the ownership and control of the
earth. Democratic government as presently constituted, and democratic
world government as currently proposed, ungrounded and unembedded in
equal rights to the earth, cannot create the world of peace and justice
that we seek.
THE CRACK IN THE LIBERTY BELL
To fully grasp the nature of the severe limitations in the current
ideology of the world government movement, it is necessary to follow
the thread of the democratic ideal back to its fundamental tenets.
Pondering the problem of persistent poverty within a democratic system
of government, Richard Noyes, New Hampshire State Representative and
editor of the book entitled, Now the Synthesis: Capitalism, Socialism,
and the New Social Contract, identifies the current land tenure system
as
"the one great imperfection, the snag on which freedom catches."
Noyes shows us that the "Age of Reason gave us a thesis with flaws."
John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government, the political bible of
the founding fathers, held that "The great and chief end of men's
uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government is
the preservation of their property." The central understanding was that
only through the guarantee of property rights, one's own body included,
could the individual really be free.
In further defining property rights, Locke stated that "every man has a
`property' in his own =B3person"', so that anything a man has "removed
from the common state," anything with which he has "mixed his own
labor," is rightfully his own. The securing of this right was to be the
main duty of a democratic government.
Locke also affirmed that "God hath given the world to men in common."
But the trouble lies with Locke's Second Proviso regarding property.
Locke maintained that it was correct for the individual in a state of
nature to mix his labor with land and so call it (produced wealth) his
own "since there was still enough (land) and as good left, and more than
the yet unprovided could use."
In the Second Proviso the reasoning of the primary mentor of the
founding fathers was faulty and limited. Locke failed to perceive the
consequences for democracy of a time when so few humans would come to
control so much of the earth, to the exclusion of the vast majority. Nor
could he have known how the forces of an industrial economy could drive
land values to such highs, to the benefit of landowners rather than wage
earners.
The property-in-land problem, insufficiently scrutinized by John Locke
and the founding fathers, is the crack in the Liberty Bell. It is the
root dilemma of democracy. Life and liberty without land rights breeds
unhappiness, unemployment, and wage slavery.
Adam Smith was of no more help than John Locke when it came to solving
the land problem. Although initially he made clear distinctions among
land, labor, and capital, he soon began using the terms capital and land
as synonymous factors. Consequently, mainstream economists have treated
land as essentially no more than a subset of capital in their own
two-factor (capital and labor) macroeconomics. This is why they have
failed to understand the grave problem of the maldistribution of wealth
which has grown out of the fact that a minuscule percentage of the
world's people have come to control and consume the vast majority of the
earth's land and natural
resources.
THE COMMON HERITAGE PRINCIPLE AND PUBLIC FINANCE
The resolution of the dilemma of democracy can be found in a
three-factor (land, labor, capital) macroeconomic approach. The products
resulting from the interaction of land and labor are rightfully held as
individual private property, while land (which term includes all natural
resources) is recognized as the common heritage.
Once the human right to the earth is firmly established in the minds and
policies of a democratic majority, land will no longer be taken by the
few from the many either by the force of military might or by the
mechanisms of the market. The market's ability to place value, combined
with the efficiency of money as an exchange medium, results in a range
of prices for land sites and natural resources. Those who simply "own"
earth resources, contribute nothing as such to the productive process.
Yet under the current private property ethic, they are in an
advantageous position of power and can extract the ransom of what
economists call "ground rent" from both labor and productive capital.
But if we now apply the common heritage principle to land, then it
follows that ground rent, which is a measure of natural resource value,
must be treated as "common property." The next step which three-factor
economists take is to link this insight with the public finance system.
Voila! The policy imperative becomes clear. A way to affirm the equal
right of all to the common heritage is to collect the ground rent for
the benefit of the community as a whole, a policy frequently referred to
as "land value taxation."
Confiscatory taxes on labor and productive capital should gradually be
removed, as the value of earth resources becomes the proper source of
funding for the community as a whole. The "common wealth" finances the
commonwealth.
Three-factor economists thus advocate a practical policy that will solve
the problem of Locke's Second Proviso, which falsely assumed no
limitation to natural resources. Democracy can now be established on the
firm foundation of equal rights to the earth, our common heritage.
While this perspective is newly emerging, it is not new. No less a
figure than Tom Paine stated that "Men did not make the earth. . . It is
the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is
individual property. . . . Every proprietor owes to the community a
ground rent for the land which he holds." Where does that leave us in
our consideration of the world order movement, the concept of
"sovereignty," and the need for financing the activities of the U.N. or
any other global body?
THE NEW DEMOCRATIC COVENANT
Clearly, the mandate of a benevolent yet powerful sovereign global
governmental body must be to protect the property rights of the bodies
of individuals as well as the products of their labor (private
property), as well as to protect and to fairly share our common body
Mother Earth.
This is the new territorial imperative, the new democratic covenant, the
higher synthesis resolving what has been the difficult and
too-often-destructive dialectic of left versus right.
A properly constituted global authority will seek to further these
principles both within and among the current nations. Once the
importance of the new territorial imperative of equal rights to earth is
grasped by the world order movement, then it follows that ground rent
(land value) should be advocated as the appropriate source of public
finance from local to global levels.
EXAMPLES OF GROUND RENT POLICIES
This taxation approach is not merely theoretical but is being
implemented, at least in part, in a number of places. In the United
States, enabling legislation in Pennsylvania gives cities the option of
shifting their property taxes off of buildings (productive capital) and
onto land values only (common heritage). The fifteen cities taxing land
values at the higher rate have been experiencing statistically
significant economic benefits.
Alaska retained its oil lands as public land, subject to fair leasehold
arrangements for use plus a tax on each barrel pumped for market. Assets
in the Alaska Permanent Fund are about $13 billion. 'There are no state
income or sales taxes, and every citizen of Alaska receives an annual
dividend of about $1000 each with an additional $250 per month to every
citizen 65 years or older.
Movements in this direction are underway through- out the world. In the
spring of 1993, representatives of eighty Russian cities signed a
resolution to reform their public revenue system in this manner.
On the global level, the Law of the Seas, the Moon Treaty, and the
treaty now governing Antarctica are all based on the common heritage
principle, a principle that now must be extended worldwide to include
surface lands, as well as oil and mineral resources.
HATCHING MANY BIRDS OUT OF ONE EGG
As the taxation of land values, essentially a "user fee" system, becomes
an integral component of the agenda of planet management, several birds
will begin to hatch out of one egg.
Simultaneously,
(1) land tenure will be based on fairness, not force, thus ameliorating
territorial conflict, a root
cause of war;
(2) land resources can be equitably allocated;
(3) the economic playing field is leveled;
(4) a genuinely free market is encouraged;
(5) the gap between the rich and poor narrows; and
(6) the necessary collective activities of humanity are properly funded,
which include peacekeeping and the restoration and protection of the
environment.
COMMON HERITAGE FUNDING: LOCAL TO GLOBAL
It has been suggested that such a system of finance would be based on
principles of subsidiarity in terms of implementation. The ground rent
of certain specific types of land re- sources can be collected by
clearly delineated governing bodies from the local to the global level.
Thus, cities and counties would draw their funding from the ground rent
of surface lands; regional authorities would collect the ground rent of
oil and minerals, and global governing agencies would be funded by a
percentage from these two levels as well as that of deep sea resources,
the electromagnetic spectrum, satellite orbital zones, and other
transnational resources.
Democratic rights to the planet can be vested in the people as a whole
in a way that can be understood easily and administered practically. The
advent of the information revolution combined with the personal computer
enables such a system to be monitored by the masses. Who owns what,
where, and how much ground rent they pay into the common fund could
become the most enlightening computer game on earth.
A WARNING AND AN APPEAL
If we fail to tax land values for the common fund, the concentrated
control of earth in the hands of the few will continue unmitigated, thus
advancing the conditions of social turmoil which too often burst into
flames of hatred, murder, and war.
Marx is in the morgue, and in the West there is a dawning realization
that the huge bureaucracies of the welfare state, which confiscate the
wages of the middle classes through the income tax in the attempt to
provide a safety net (rather than a safe nest!) for the poor, are not
only unwieldy but unworkable as well.
I am appealing to my brothers and sisters in the world order/planetary
peace and justice movements to deeply consider the fundamental
assumptions of the planet/people relationship as it concerns the entire
question of land tenure. I trust that this consideration will discard
both the power politics of "dominion," as well as the market construct
of buying and selling our Mother Earth for private profit.
Currently, certain monetary and debt repayment policies and practices of
the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are strangling the
economies and harming the people of many developing nations. This
reality relates to the theme of this exposition in a major way.
A significant proportion of the "profit" that has poured into the global
banking system in the past several decades was not a product of honest
labor, but was in fact a pool of funds generated from the ground rent of
oil resources. These funds were loaned to numerous developing countries
where they were frequently of benefit to the ruling elite rather than
the people as a whole. However, the debt repayments have now fallen upon
the middle class and poor citizens who neither voted for nor gained from
the borrowed money.
Morally and ethically, a vast amount of the funds of the International
Monetary Fund and the World Bank represent a theft from the global
commons. Under the common heritage principle, these funds would have
been used to benefit the people of the world either by direct dividends
or as interest free loans through a revolving loan fund type of system.
These "oil theft loans" made by the world financial institutions should
therefore be declared illegal and invalid. In the future, any other
money loaned to governments by global financial institutions should be
repaid from the ground rent of the indebted nations. Such repayments
would therefore fall primarily upon those who are unjustly reaping the
benefits of valuable land holdings rather than further burdening the
struggling wage earners, small business owners, and the oppressed poor.
Unless a reformed or empowered United Nations or other world government
is built firmly upon the principle of equal rights for all to our
planet, then both the government and the planet will be controlled by a
handful of vested interests. It is up to the intellectual leadership of
the world order movement to grapple with this issue NOW - to stop
hedging and waiting for the messiah of world government to descend.
Before we purport to know the global governmental recipe for success,
let us consider how to make one city succeed. What would it take for the
wealth gap between rich and poor to begin to narrow each year instead of
widening, for the murder rate to plummet rather than skyrocket, for the
schools to become safer rather than scarier?
If the present political structure of democracy were sufficient for the
task, then Washington, D.C. would be the New Jerusalem, Philadelphia
would truly be a city of brotherly love, and every slice of the Big
Apple would taste sweet.
To have peace on earth, we must work to create the conditions for peace
in our own towns and cities. If we would revitalize our urban habitats
by improving schools and libraries, creating livelihoods and affordable
housing, and maintaining safe and beautiful parks and playgrounds, then
we must urge our city council members to collect the ground rent of land
to finance public services and greatly reduce or eliminate most other
forms of taxation.
If the politics of the planet are to be based on fairness rather than on
force, then equal rights to earth must become the guiding principle, the
sovereign, supreme rule. The fundamental human right which now needs to
be affirmed is this -- THE EARTH IS THE BIRTHRIGHT OF ALL PEOPLE.
Alanna Hartzok co-chaired the Alternative Economic Commission at the
recent Conference on Global Governance sponsored by the Association of
World Citizens and the Campaign for A More Democratic United Nations
(CAMDUN). She is the United Nations Non-Governmental Organization
Representative for the International Union for Land Value Taxation and
Free Trade
and Executive Director of Earth Rights Institute.
COMMENTS
"World citizens must be concerned with the growing gap between rich and=20
poor in the world and within democracies. Conventional economics has failed=
=20
miserably. Alanna Hartzok's application of the common heritage principle to=
=20
land and 'land value taxation' offers a refreshing new approach."
Ross Smyth, President World Government Organization Coalition
"Alanna Hartzok has recognized that the earth is the birthright of all=20
peoples and that prevailing notions of state sovereignty must yield to the=
=20
new thinking that the only real sovereigns are the people If we are all to=
=20
live together in peace and dignity, it must become a reality that the land,=
=20
the sea, and the air we breathe are a common heritage to serve the basic=20
rights of human kind."
Dr. Benjamin B. Ferencz Prosecutor, Nuremburg War Crimes Trial Adjunct=20
Professor of International Law Pace University
"Alanna Hartzok has given us a fascinating account of the economic=20
necessity of building democracy in human terms from the ground upwards.=20
World governmentalists should start their re-think from here."
Dr. Jeffrey J. Segal, Co-Founder Campaign for a More Democratic United=
Nations
"I enjoyed reading Financing Planet Management and found it to be a=20
valuable contribution to the quest for world government on a democratic=20
basis. We do need to have a politics based on fairness and with the earth=20
as our birthright."
Leland P. Stewart, Founder Unity-In-Diversity Council
"I'm very much in favor of the ideas proposed in your paper. I agree very=20
much with you that world federalists and world governmentalists need to=20
think through the fundamentals of economic justice"
Jack Yost, United Nations NGO Representative World Federalist Movement
"Your paper is a cogent and convincing reply to the appeal for an economic=
=20
engine to propel the 'democratic world order', 'global peace and justice',=
=20
and 'environmentally sustainable development' movements. It is an evocative=
=20
introduction to a crucial worldwide discussion by citizens locally and=20
opinion-makers internationally and confirms your qualifications to serve as=
=20
a coordinator for the Campaign for a More Democratic United Nations=
(CAMDUN)."
Dr. Harry H. Lerner, Co-Founder CAMDUN
"One thing that has troubled me about the world government concept is the=20
fact that our continuing failure to be able to use power wisely at any=20
local level, with which I am familiar, casts doubt on the possibility that=
=20
we homosapiens would be able to do any better at the highest level. Your=20
essay correctly isolates land title as the modern day weapon-- the one=20
which has so recently replaced the Auchelian 'almond-shaped hand axes'=20
Louis S. B. Leakey found at Olduvia, and the even earlier thigh bones which=
=20
seem to have bashed in so many skulls. Your essay is calculated to focus=20
the attention of the world peace movement at a critical place."
Representative Richard Noyes New Hampshire State House of Representatives
"Many organizations that advocate peace, human rights, or alleviation of=20
poverty suggest temporary charitable measures or a future ideal solution to=
=20
world problems, at once inadequate on one hand and frustrating on the=20
other. Alanna Hartzok in Financing Planet Management makes a vital=20
connection for creating world peace and order. In this concise but=20
insightful narrative, the author has us realize the importance of providing=
=20
a sound base from which democracy, justice, and equitable opportunity can=20
proceed."
Hal Sager, Media Producer Trustee, Common Ground-USA
"We are fond of citing history yet refuse to act in accordance with the=20
lessons that are apparent. Past civilizations have collapsed and perished=20
by their own making and by stubborn adherence to their profit and power=20
paradigms. The unchecked depletion and destruction of natural resources and=
=20
eco-systems, is an old story repeating again and again. In every case where=
=20
there was the holding of land by the few out of the hands of most, the=20
result was the horror of war or economic collapse. The nation-state=20
country-clubs have not been able to rise from the muck of myopic views and=
=20
economic illusions. Hartzok drops the veils through which we see economics=
=20
and profits courageously calls for a gentle revolution in our relationship=
=20
to the planet-one that is not only necessary, but vital to our very=
survival."
Mary Rose Kaczorowski Action Coalition For Global Change Ten Mile River=20
Watershed Association
"Ms. Hartzok has a firm, intuitive grasp of basic economic and political=20
principles."
Dr. Mason Gaffney, Professor of Economics University of California,=
Riverside
Dear Reader, I invite your comments on this essay which, with your=20
permission, may be printed in whole or in part in future editions. I invite=
=20
your questions as well, which I will try to answer in correspondence back=20
to you. Please write comments and/or questions on a separate page and send=
=20
or fax back with this form.
Most sincerely yours,
Alanna Hartzok
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alanna, You have my permission to print my comments, in whole or in
part, in the
next edition of this publication.
Signature __________________________________ Date _________________
Name (clearly print or type) ______________________________________
Line of work, Association, etc. ___________________________________
=7F YES! I have checked Yes to include my signature on the growing list of
those endorsing the
International Declaration on Individual and Common Rights to Earth.
=7F YES! Put me in touch with others in my area who are working to
implement these ideas.
Street Address, Apt., P.O. Box ____________________________________
City, Town _______________________ State, Zip _____________________
Home Phone _______________________ Work Phone _____________________
Fax # ____________________________
PLEASE MAIL OR FAX THIS PAGE TO:
Alanna Hartzok, P.O. Box328, Scotland, PA 17254 USA
Message Phone/FAX: 717-263-2820 Res.: 717-264-0957
Earth Rights Institute
Box 328
Scotland, PA, 17254, USA
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello,
New Media Strategies
- ------------------------------------
http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480
Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World
- ------------------------------------------------
"If we want to change the world, we have to
begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 02:51:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: "!Dr. Joe Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [IFWP] Re: (OT) Re: Sunset for sunrise
On Sun, 14 May 2000, Repoman wrote:
> ( Answer to !Dr Joe: Yes I'm new here and grateful to be able to share my
simple
> views on topics utilizeing my simple instincts honed by 'hands on brick
and
> mortar' as I suspect you are as well.
Yup
> Btw: What the hell is a 'Fud'?My guess: F....unfounded drivel"?)
FUD = Fear - Uncertainty - and Doubt. A process employed by the Crispy
twins whenever they run out of answers - which is often. Also ICANN's
main strategy when it's claim to the domain space is challenged.
Here's an example of FUD. Any time people talk about running their own
root servers, ICANNer's start spreading the FUD. Saying all sort of
problem will result from that. However the FACTS dictate that sooner or
later we will all be running our own root servers.
But FUD will always remain FUD. Simply put the internet serves humans and
if it crashes it will be humans who will find a solution - not
ICANN. People are by nature self organizing, and should the existing
domain infrastructure crash - which is very possible - people will simply
start up their own root servers and route around the problem.
WHY - you may ask? HOW - will this come about?
Well - simply put ICANN runs 13 root servers. All of those root servers
are very vulnerable to attack. DNS is by default a very insecure
protocol, easily hacked. Also, there has never been a DDOS against the 13
roots. If a DDOS is ever launched against the ICANN roots then I gurantee
you that alot of people will not be surfing for a few days.
But the day that happens will be the day we all end up running our own
roots. I already run my own by the way.
Regards
Joe Baptista
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 04:42:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: "!Dr. Joe Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [IFWP] dot.god is property.
Hello:
Today I have begun moving the dot.god registry to a new box. We will be
running a one year test of the dot.god top level domain, formerly a
private tld employed and operated by the Church of the Universe in various
internal networks. The naming practice for tld.god began when it was
decided to provide internal resources to the brothers and all systems on
the private network were named something.god. later the brother
introduced the dot.satan tld for naming buggy computers on the internal
network. Alot of NT ended up in the dot.satan tld.
At this time we are drafting a charter for dot.god. The gist of it will
define that all dot.god second level domains are property. There will be
a one time fee to setup the domain space, and then a yearly fee for
maintanence. The yearly maintenance fee (our idea of property tax) will
be between $3.00 to $5.00 per year.
An administrative contract will provide management services for the tld
until such time as a community of owners is established at which time such
domain owners will be given control of the dot.god zone. We've been
debating defining a community as anything from 5,000 domain owners to
1 million.
I would welcome any suggestions concerning the above statement so I can
present it to the brothers and sisters for consideration.
I expect the tld will be tested for one year and we'll also be looking for
people willing to test. You will get a free dot.god tld for your effort
in helping us test. I'll be posting further details and applications
regarding this to the following lists:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NCDNHC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dot.god allows for anonymous registrations and all applications will be
allowed a privacy flag. This means you can restrict people from accessing
your email address using our whois server.
Here's an example of a public whois output:
$ whois -h whois.pccf.net god.god
Welcome to .whois server
Database updated on: Wed Jan 12 04:04:16 EST 2000
Domain: god.god
Handle: 554909989110
Created: December 14, 1999
Updated: December 14, 1999
Status: Active
Description: The Gates of St. Peter start here!
Email: god@god
Organization: GOD Inc.
Virtual Map: PARKED AT NIC
and this is an example of a private whois output:
bash-2.03$ whois -h whois.pccf.net my.god
Welcome to .whois server
Database updated on: Wed Jan 12 04:04:16 EST 2000
Domain: my.god
Handle: 76889-21445
Created: January 12, 2000
Updated: January 12, 2000
Status: Active
PRIVATE DOMAIN: email domain contact via the following URL
http://god.pccf.net/cgi-bin/emailadmin?my.god=76889-21445
The whois URL's by the way won't work at this time.
Feel free to ask questions and more importantly your suggestions would be
welcomed.
Regards
Joe Baptista
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 07:49:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: "!Dr. Joe Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [IFWP] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-requirements-02.txt (fwd)
Well at least were moving closer to internationalized domain names, at
least one guide closer.
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 06:51:07 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: IETF-Announce: ;
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-requirements-02.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Internationalized Domain Name Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : Requirements of Internationalized Domain Names
Author(s) : Z. Wenzel, J. Seng
Filename : draft-ietf-idn-requirements-02.txt
Pages : 8
Date : 12-May-00
This document describes the requirement for encoding international
characters into DNS names and records. This document is guidance for
developing protocols for internationalized domain names.
A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idn-requirements-02.txt
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
"get draft-ietf-idn-requirements-02.txt".
A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.
Send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body type:
"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idn-requirements-02.txt".
NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this
feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers
exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
how to manipulate these messages.
Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 08:22:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: (OT) Re: Sunset for sunrise
At 02:51 AM 5/15/00 -0400, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
>> Btw: What the hell is a 'Fud'?My guess: F....unfounded drivel"?)
>
>FUD = Fear - Uncertainty - and Doubt.
Hey, could we change it to "fucking unfounded drivel"? That's good.
- --
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719
It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 10:41:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [IFWP] Your names council at work
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Digitel - Ken Stubbs)
>To: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Re: [IFWP] Re: (OT) Re: Sunset for sunrise
>Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 08:33:46 -0400
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
>
>glad to hear your up & awake !!!
>
>
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "Ken Stubbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Re: Is Barbie a famous mark?
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 20:50:53 -0400
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
i always appreciate those "special words of guidance" from you richard.
stay healthy and make sure baptista keeps taking his meds regularly
best wishes
ken
To: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Re: unsubscribe
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 13:27:51 -0400
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
> ><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> ><HTML><HEAD>
> ><META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
> ><META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
> ><STYLE></STYLE>
> ></HEAD>
> ><BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
> ><DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
and dont forget to brush your teeth after each meal !!
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "Ken Stubbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Re: unsubscribe
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 13:26:04 -0400
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
thanks richard !!!
my best wishes to you as well !
keep bathing regularly !!
- --
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719
It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR
------------------------------
End of IFWP_LIST V1 #804
************************
