ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] .net Domain Up For Grabs - In the news - NY Times/slashdot

  • To: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] .net Domain Up For Grabs - In the news - NY Times/slashdot
  • From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:43:18 -0800
  • Cc: General Assembly of the DNSO <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, icann board address <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>, Paul Twomey <twomey@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
  • References: <20050119145619.19221.qmail@web52904.mail.yahoo.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Eric and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,

 Your right of course about two types of serious lies.  And yes, saying
that
any appointed team/group is independent is a serious lie...  Hence the
process as I indicated in my earlier comments/remarks [ see below Erics
]
are relevant and should be seriously considered given the false claim
of these appointed folks as being independent...

  So as I have often said in the past, if you have a poor process, you
will almost always end up with bad or poor results.  Project Gemeni
in the middle 60's found this out the hard way...

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>    There are two type of serious lies. One by omission when there is a
> trust relationship. One by outright falsity. Both are made serious
> when they are made with an intent to effect someone else to their
> detriment and to the benefit of someone else.
> Saying that there is an independent team is a lie. Is it serious? Is
> it made to hurt one party and benefit another? Does anyone trust the
> source or is it just a spoof? Does a tax make a difference?
>
> Eric
>
> Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> All former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,
>
> >From Slasdot and the NY Times:
>
> " The New York Times is reporting that the bidding is on for the
> .net domain currently administered by VeriSign.VeriSign's current
> contract expires June 30th; applications are due today. Three
> companies are known to be interested: NeuStar, which currently
> manages .biz, Afilias, which manages .info, and Denic eG,
> a non-profit that manages the German .de domain. ICANN
> is bending over backward to avoid any suggestion of bias due to
> its conflict with VeriSign over VeriSign's Site Finder "service" and
> has appointed an independent team to evaluate the applications.
> VeriSign has been lobbying hard to keep the domain and is reported
> to have received letters of support from Microsoft and IBM."
>
> See:
> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=05/01/18/141210
> http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~wjposer
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/17/
> echnology/17domain.html?ex=1263704400&en=e36cf08a057b36c3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
>
> It seems rather odd and disingenuous at least that if Paul Twomey
> "Appointed" this so called independent body to evaluate these bids
> and truly consider such a "Appointed" body to be independent. Is
> yet again the fix in? Shouldn't the Domain Name holders or .net
> domain names be making this decision of at least have a significant
> voice in whom takes over .net? When one looks at whom the major
> bidders
> are, Affilias, NueStar, and Dnic eG from germany running the .de
> cctld,
> one can't really find a good choice. Dnic eG is unlikely to get the
> bid due to the importance of .Net to the USG. And god help us
> all if either Affilias or NueStar get the bid, who's performance thus
> far has been abysmal and shady...
>
> This process to me, and all of our members seems to yet again
> demonstrate that ICANN and it's staff and BoD do not trust
> the stakeholders/users, or do not wish to properly recognize
> their stake...
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
>
> "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
> Pierre Abelard
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Registered Email addr with the USPS
> Contact Number: 214-244-4827
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>