SUSPENSION RE: [ga] RE: Monthly Reports

["Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi All
 
This morning, as List Monitor, I received a private complaint with regard to
the posting from Jeff Williams (see below).  I consider the complainant to
be correct in that the post was, at the very least, inflammatory.
 
As Jeff Williams has in the past had his posting rights suspended for 8
weeks, according to our list rules, he may now be suspended for 16 weeks.
 
As List Monitor, I have asked the Secretariat to action this and am reliably
informed that Jeff Williams will have his posting rights restored on the 5th
of August 2009.
 
Jeff, please take this email as official notification of your suspension.
 
Best regards
 
Debbie Garside
List Monitor
 
 


  _____  

From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Hugh Dierker
Sent: 15 April 2009 19:14
To: George Kirikos; Jeffrey A. Williams
Cc: Patrick Jones; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ga] RE: Monthly Reports



Jeff, George, and Patrick,
 
This is pretty inflamatory to some Jeff. No not censorable, but kind of a
defamation by very extenuated association. Kind of a drive by yellow
journalistic charactar assasination.
I, who know you well, believe it is below your U.S.Marine code of conduct.
Along with you I will die for your right to say it. Patricks honor is not
brought to question by such remarks, but perhaps yours is.
 
The thread is educational and in keeping with GA tradition. George as always
helps to keep us informed of critical matters within his expetise and should
be proud of his contributions to ICANN and particularly the GA. One
excellent area he has helped in is bringing ICANN executive types into our
forum in a gracious and dignified manner. I was looking forward to some
clarifications from Patrick.
 
Patrick serves this community and brings skills and experience that are
uniquely valuable to  .... well, the world. There is absolutely nothing in
his record that is dishonorable as a public servant of the net. Causing him
embarassment or consternation unnecessarily is dead wrong.
 
Lookie here, I don't necessarily agree with any positions in this thread,
but as our best excuse for a chair in the GA, I ask that dignity and honor
be placed a bit above our universal right to say whatever the hell we want.
 
As all our Christian friends celebrate a traditional time of ascencion, let
us try to ascend to a bit higher road of communication and respect.
 
Eric Hugh Dierker

--- On Tue, 4/14/09, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] RE: Monthly Reports
To: "George Kirikos" <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Patrick Jones" <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 8:51 PM


George and all,



  Perhaps this quip from the IOC is as a result of Patricks efforts

and as such explaines his employment with ICANN currently?

I am certainly no fan of the IOC given their past association

with one Kurt Waldhime whom was later exposed as an ex-nazi

which greatly explained many of his odd decisions for the IOC.



George Kirikos wrote:



> Hi Patrick,

>

> Just a quick followup, there's a certain delicious irony that

according to your bio:

>

> http://www.icann.org/en/biog/jones.htm

> http://www.webcitation.org/5g2ZocLPw

>

> you "assisted with e-commerce issues, domain name protection and

intellectual property enforcement for a variety of clients, including the

International Olympic Committee" in your prior life before ICANN. Now, the

IOC is threatening to sue ICANN if the new gTLD plan goes ahead:

>

> http://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/09/olympics-to-icann-well-sue-you/

>

> If ICANN is not going to listen to me, and not going to listen to the

DOJ/DOC/NTIA, they might want to listen to the IOC, especially if you ever
hope

to go back to having them as a client one day post-ICANN.

>

> Sincerely,

>

> George Kirikos

> http://www.leap.com/

>

> --- On Tue, 4/14/09, George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>

> > From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>

> > Subject: RE: Monthly Reports

> > To: "Patrick Jones" <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx>

> > Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 7:55 PM

> > Hi Patrick,

> >

> > You're correct that the total need not be summed up.

> > However, the entire column for domains at each registry was

> > missing, as were other columns. If you read page 6 of the

> > dot-cat PDF for December 2008, which duplicates the Appendix

> > 4 fields, there are 35 required fields. However, there were

> > only columns A through W submitted on the spreadsheet table

> > (which is 23 fields). Thus 12 fields (columns) were entirely

> > missing. It's not just the totals (in a row) that were

> > missing (which were optional). Appendix 4 does state:

> >

> > http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agreements/cat/cat-appendix4-22mar06.htm

> >

> > "This report shall be transmitted to ICANN

> > electronically in comma or pipe separated-value format,

> > using the following fields per registrar:"

> >

> > so it's relatively easy to count up to 35, to see that

> > all fields are present. For ICANN staff earning above market

> > salaries:

> >

> >

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090105_icann_for_profit_companies_comparable
s/

> >

> > I would think that knowing there's a difference between

> > 23 and 35 would be something "above average"

> > employees would be qualified to know. If they don't know

> > that difference, I'd suggest the CFO cut people's

> > paycheques by 12/35ths, to see if they notice a difference.

> >

> > Most ICANN staff members typically ignore questions to them

> > (save for those coming from registry operators who pay for

> > fancy parties at ICANN meetings), unless the issue is

> > published on the lists to "prod them" into action.

> > If there is an official email address that is public and

> > archived, feel free to post it, and that might encourage

> > people to submit it to staff who will then be responsive

> > (because their lack of an answer can be monitored by all).

> > You'll note for example the Mexico Question Box answers

> > didn't appear until I posted about it on the GA list:

> >

> > http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg02775.html

> >

> > and even then, answers were evasive, e.g. ICANN denied

> > receiving any notice they were researching my views on

> > Obama!

> >

> > http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg02826.html

> >

> > ICANN knows the timestamp and IP address of the individual,

> > so they certainly know exactly who was responsible.

> >

> > I don't feel so bad that my concerns are ignored, given

> > ICANN has also ignored the NTIA/DOJ/DOC in their new gTLD

> > comments. Unlike them, I have no power whatsoever over

> > ICANN. It would be better if ICANN continued to ignore me,

> > but instead listened to the NTIA/DOJ/DOC (and the concerns

> > of the vast majority of the public who oppose new gTLDs), if

> > ICANN truly cares about its long-term survival. But, if they

> > plan to listen to everyone, that's fine too. I guess

> > we'll see for sure whether ICANN turns the corner and

> > becomes responsive to the community if the new gTLD plan is

> > simply shelved or put on the backburner for further study.

> > Time will tell.

> >

> > Sincerely,

> >

> > George Kirikos

> > http://www.leap.com/

> >

> > --- On Tue, 4/14/09, Patrick Jones

> > <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >

> > > From: Patrick Jones <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx>

> > > Subject: RE: Monthly Reports

> > > To: "gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx"

> > <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>

> > > Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 7:14 PM

> > > George,

> > >

> > > I saw your post on the GA list about the Monthly

> > Reports.

> > > Not all of the registries include a total of monthly

> > domains

> > > on their monthly reports. I can assure you there is no

> > > conspiracy at work - this discrepancy is being

> > corrected and

> > > will be posted tomorrow. Field #3 in the appendix

> > requires

> > > the registry to submit the total number of domains

> > under

> > > management by each registrar, but there is not a

> > requirement

> > > that each registry provide a total at the bottom of

> > column

> > > #3 adding up the number (it would be great if all

> > provided

> > > this when submitted). The line item is added manually

> > in the

> > > monthly reports.

> > >

> > > Hopefully future automation will provide better

> > reporting

> > > and tools for the community.

> > >

> > > Feel free to pass this response on to the GA list. If

> > you

> > > have questions in the future, feel free to direct them

> > to

> > > staff.

> > >

> > > Best regards,

> > >

> > > Patrick

> > >

> > > --

> > > Patrick L. Jones

> > > Registry Liaison Manager &

> > > Support to ICANN Nominating Committee

> > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers

> > > 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330

> > > Marina del Rey, CA 90292

> > > Tel: +1 310 301 3861

> > > patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx

> > > patrickjones.tel



Regards,



Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)

"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -

   Abraham Lincoln

"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama



"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