ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


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

Re: [ga] Matthew Hooker from Los Angeles ICANN meeting

  • To: "Prophet Partners Inc." <Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Matthew Hooker from Los Angeles ICANN meeting
  • From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:20:57 -0800

Ted and all,

  Most of our members also are members of the ICA and all
are registrants.

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"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.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827

"Prophet Partners Inc." wrote:

> Hi Joop,
>
> Prophet Partners Inc. is a member of the Internet Commerce
> Association, which is proactive with respect to ICANN issues and sends
> representatives to ICANN meetings. We would also be receptive to
> discussing a reasonable plan for formal registrant representation
> within ICANN, such as a registrant constituency.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ted
> Prophet Partners Inc.
> http://www.ProphetPartners.com
> http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com ----- Original Message -----From:
> "Joop Teernstra" <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>To: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Sent:
> Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:58 PMSubject: Re: [ga] Matthew Hooker
> from Los Angeles ICANN meeting >
> > At 02:08 p.m. 18/01/2008, Prophet Partners Inc. wrote:
> >>Hi Jeff,
> >>
> >>I posted this info to the list because I believe it is important for
>
> >>people to know who claims to be representing registrant interests.
> >
> > Ted,
> >
> > If you truly find that important, then why not back a structure
> where such
> > representatives can be properly filtered and elected?
> >
> > Instead of kicking over the  delusional strawman, isn't it better to
> heed
> > the message : lacking a proper representational structure, a Bill of
>
> > Registrant Rights is indeed the next best thing registrants could
> hope for.
> >
> > Don't you agree, Roberto?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -joop-
> >
> >
> >


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