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

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,


--- Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> George,
> 
> What's the real point of your tirade?

Nice attempt to sidestep the issues I raised. The "real points" were
mentioned in the text. I suggest you try to read them. This isn't the
Da Vinci Code or The Number 23 -- I don't write in some "secret code"
with a "hidden point" that you can decipher if you read every 23rd word
of every 23rd page.
 
(snipped, irrelevant comments attacking the BC, etc.)

> How do you have the gall to criticize these volunteers
> that are doing their best to stay informed and
> contribute meaningfully while your own constituency
> members are characterized more by their absence than
> by any of their contributions?

"Their best" is not good enough. Trying to make some excuses like "oh,
these are only volunteers, so we should hold them to low standards" is
not good enough.
 
> Sure we have some kooks on this list, but that's the

Some? hahaha Check the most active posters lists. And Avri felt she was
"going in the right direction" by letting the kooks take charge, even
though, in her words "that no such entity currently exists as part of
ICANN" 

Yes or no --- do these "kooks", who claim that they are "chair" or
whatever the mot du jour is in their fantasy lives, speak for you? Do
they speak for Vint Cerf, who was a member of this list last I check,
or for Tim Ruiz, or for Avri Doria or for Veni Markovski or Chuck
Gomes? I'd like to see a list of people that you believe the "chair",
who has not substantiated his claimed credentials, represents. :) Go
ahead. Those whose company's opinions are represented by "the chair" (a
chair which does not exist, as you can't have a chair of a non-existent
entity; the "chair of the GA" is as real as the "president of
INEGroup")), go ahead and make yourself known.

(more babble attacking the BC trimmed)

> That lack of respect must have rubbed off on you as
> your latest remarks are abusive in the extreme and
> serve no constructive purpose.  Since when did you
> need to resort to personal attacks in order to make a
> point?  Get a grip.

I made no personal attacks -- I attacked poor decisions and actions
that were taken, not the person. If others made the same poor
decisions, they should be held accountable. Yet, Avri puts her head in
the sand, happy to remain invisible, and further diminish the stature
of GNSO Chair, the exact opposite of what the LSE report recommended.

As for "serving no constructive purpose", re-read the last 4
recommended courses of actions at:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg00146.html

starting with #1. Are you against renaming the "GA List" to something
that will not cause confusion?  Or, would it destroy the kook "fantasy
life" that the confusion end, and that the outside world know that this
list is no "general assembly" by the dictionary definition of "general
assembly" ?? #2, Are you against creating a cross constituency list,
that is closed to the kooks? and so on.

You took the time out to write a response, but you'll notice you did
not address the substance of what I wrote. Focus on that in the future,
and perhaps your contributions will be serving a "constructive
purpose." 

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/