ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [ga] Questions for Joe Baptista / Eric Dierker, and why the GA list should be ended

  • To: <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>, <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [ga] Questions for Joe Baptista / Eric Dierker, and why the GA list should be ended
  • From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 09:39:02 +0100

Hi George

Welcome back to the GA list :-)

With regard to your mail, as far as I am aware nobody has asked either Eric
or Joe for a CV.  As to Eric making statements as "Chair of the GA"... He is
Chair of the GA!

You may be interested to know that we currently have an election ongoing for
the post of Chair of the GA.  You may nominate a candidate should you so
wish (see http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules6.htm)

Finally, if I could draw your attention to section 3.3 of our list rules, I
would appreciate it if you could adhere to these rules in future posts.

Best regards

Debbie Garside
GA List Monitor

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of George Kirikos
> Sent: 17 September 2007 22:00
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: avri@xxxxxxx
> Subject: [ga] Questions for Joe Baptista / Eric Dierker, and
> why the GA list should be ended
> Hello,
> I'm temporarily rejoined this list, as I had a set of
> questions for Joe Baptista and Eric Dierker, and question
> whether this list has any remaining legitimacy.
> 1. Joe Baptista routinely refers to himself using the moniker "Dr."
> Indeed, he's referred to as such in Harvard's study of the
> GA-Full list
> at:
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/publicparticipation/
> According to:
> http://web.archive.org/web/20030225054736/http://www.kkc.net/baptista/
> in an article discussing fax-bombing and wasting of
> government resources by Mr. Baptista, and other net-pranks,
> he's not really a doctor.
> "They call themselves "The Doctors" because Baptista says
> that when he uses the attribution, he gets better tables in
> restaurants. No member of the Doctors is a conventional doctor."
> Given this person purports to be "list monitor", and indeed has
> suggested:
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg07777.html
> "I would lke to see the GA appoint an executive and get
> itself a bank account."
> Thus, Question #1: Which insitution granted your doctorate
> degree, to allow for verification?
> 2. Given #1, and Eric Dierker's claiming to be a doctor,
> whereas an organization is purported to exist called "The
> Doctors" who simply want better tables in restaurants, which
> institution granted your doctorate degree, to allow for verification?
> 3. Related to #2, and #1, at:
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg02442.html
> Dierker wrote in relation to .pro:
> "CONTRACT; It would appear that there is/was a contractual
> obligation that this venue be reserved for us professionals.
> (mine of course with due apologies is California State Bar
> No. 112873, Ca. Trial Lawyers No.
> 65169, Order of St. Lukes - Ooops Ministers were not included in the
> criteria) Was it really reserved for us and was the process
> reserving it for me and my kind really legitmate?"
> which would lead people into believing he was a lawyer or a
> member of the bar, when the facts show otherwise:
> http://members.calbar.ca.gov/search/member_detail.aspx?x=112873
> "This member is resigned and may not practice law in California."
> Question #3a: When you referred to "us professional" and
> "reserving it for me and my kind", was Mr. Dierker not
> purporting to be an active attorney in the state of California?
> Question #3b: The website at:
> http://www.lukeford.com/stars/male/reuben_sturman.html gives
> an interesting theory (although provides no proof) as to why
> you're no longer practising law (see the five paragraphs
> beginning with "The attorney, Eric Dierker, has the records
> locked into a safe deposit box, and starts looking over his shoulder."
> Please outline the exact charges pending in 1991 by the State
> Bar of California in case #91-Q-8137, and how they might
> affect "trust issues"
> that would ensue as being "chair" of anything related to ICANN.
> 4. "Erik Dierker", who claims to be "chair" on the basis of 7
> unverified and unauthenticated votes out of a list of 200+ members,
> see:
> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg06401.html
> "Well, these results do not equal a mandate."
> has started speaking to the real press, pretending to be
> legitimately representing this "GA" to the press:
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136522-c,internetnetworking/
> article.html
> "In addition to those issues, there was some disagreement
> over accountability issues under OPoC and the speed at which
> registrars would be required to respond to requests for
> access to shielded data, said Eric Dierker, chairman of the
> general assembly of ICANN's Generic Names Supporting
> Organization. The GNSO is the body responsible for developing
> policy for the domain name system."
> Notice the definition defined the GNSO, but not the GA (i.e.
> basically a public mailing list, not formed from the
> constituencies)  itself --- this misleads people into
> thinking that the GA list is somehow equal to the GNSO
> Council. Most people hearing the words "general assembly"
> will think of the United Nations, with its General Assembly,
> and thus not understand that the GA list is simply a public
> mailing list, with no authority over policy and is not a constituency.
> This leads to the natural question: In order to eliminate
> confusion that undermines the legitimate GNSO Council, why
> should the GA list not be renamed the "Public Discussions
> Mailing List"?
> 5. Why did Avri Doria, without performing any due diligence
> into the above, make it a priority at the GNSO Council to
> give the GA List, comprised of "Doctors and Lawyers" as
> above, essentially a captured kooks list at this point, any
> legitimacy? Indeed, one can argue that the keys to the asylum
> have been turned over to the inmates. It might be appropriate
> for Ms. Doria to consider resigning as chair of the GNSO
> Council, to avoid further embarrassing GNSO Council due to
> this total lack of due diligence.
> Given the above, I nominate Vint Cerf and Sotiris
> Sotiropoulos as Chair of the GA list (not a question, but
> since apparently only kooks have been nominated, lets put up
> some competition). :)  (don't bother to nominate me, I'm only
> visiting) I would hope their first acts would be to end this list.
> I look forward to the explanations above, and anticipate my
> coming banning from this list for spoiling the net-kooks party.
> Sincerely,
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/

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