Re: [ga] Reminder
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [ga] Reminder
- From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:40:28 -0800 (PST)
- Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=wgQkSlQcv5Eyu+iA3JI7jJ1NEmJX4LmUxs2q5oiGN3vAgFfbOzJpytZTTROs/NRKmoupXO3xRJ07ahmq/VlJ/pY+n9MMaUZL2cWAtmjhKVInVYLNidki2Ijz7KCgdwgS3eqDbsWc1GUTY0nuswAovaJ7baWbFuUehyN8bajSiTE= ;
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
My dedication is not to the ICANN cause; rather I am dedicated to whatever entity can effectively keep governments at arm's length. At the moment, ICANN is the only institution that is so positioned to safeguard my interest, so for now they get my support as well as my criticisms. A properly articulated Strategic Plan is important because it will detail what we can expect in the post MOU environment. If what we will be told does not correlate well with our own vision for the future then we will have to seek out or create new alternatives. Either way, for now it wouldn't hurt to offer ICANN some guidance.
"J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I admire your dedication to the ICANN cause. The real thing is to know in
what the ICANN has helped the Internet to develop (we can all quote many
failures) and honestly evaluate if the pros beat the cons. The ISP (ICANN
Strategic Plan) is only a way to describe what the ISP should says, then to
say it as a description of the status quo, and then to describe an
administrative growth to make it.
I must say that I read the ISP. I must say I fall aslept several times. I
was just dismayed. It could have been written in 10 pages. I may be wrong
but I read it as "nothing new, except it more and more unnecessary
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.