Re: Nearly one step too far - (was: [ga] dotIQ)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jefsey and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,

  I see nothing in Eric's comment or remarks that could even remotely
suggest the warning you seem to be calling for from the absentee
moderator.

  You also seem to have forgotten this forum has not been an "Official"
forum of ICANN for nearly a year.  Maybe that fact slipped your mind?

  We stakeholders/users should always speak out clearly, as concisely
as each of us individually can, and directly whenever possible, without
concern for injuring any other stakeholders/users pride.  To advocate
otherwise would not be in keeping with good French core values and
well as American ones, especially on this 60th anniversary of D-Day
in Normandy.  To do so would be indicating a lack in the principal
of Liberty and those many brave men and women whom have paid
the ultimate price, their lives for.

  A definite anti-American tone in your remarks is also very concerning
although your right to display.  I am sure many of our members [
INEGroup ]
in France and surviving French patriots of Liberty from D-Day and
beyond,
are or will be quite incensed by such a poor tone in your remarks.

  The Decision maker ultimately is Don Evans Secretary of Commerce.
He has been sense he has been Secretary of Commerce, Jefsey.  As a
fellow Texan and a lone time close friend of president George W.Bush,
I am somewhat sure he can if he feels he needs to, to make whatever
decisions when he feels he needs to make them.

  I agree as do most of our [ INEGroup ] members that dotIQ as has
already been shown, not owned at all and not operated at all yet. Hence
leaving the Iraq stakeholders/users or future Stakeholoders/users are
not
being served very well and at present and for far too long, at all...
This
of course leaves all of us in wonderment as to the future of dotUS which

I have some comments, remarks, and information regarding to be
provided in another post in the very near future.  As the obvious
disregard for the Domain Name Holders in any ccTLD, chartered
TLD's currently proposed, and gTPLD's pending a change in status,
has been far more damaging and disruptive in some instances
unnecessarily
causing damage to those Domain Name Holders/Stakeholders/users
that can or could have been avoided if their direct access to those
whom you seem to refer to as "Decision makers"...

J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:

>   Is there still a moderator on this list?
> If yes, I ask for Mr. Dierker to be warned.
>
> The US positions are of importance for the Name Space because the root
> file
> current management and because the DNS has been used in several
> occasions
> to support US Governement _or_ large US corporation interests (the
> "or" is
> because I do not say/know who was the decision maker - yet I respect
> enough
> the professionalism of the DoC Advocacy Center to expect it to be
> coordinated among the various DoC Agencies). These political positions
>
> affecting the DNS management are therefore part of the GNSO debate. My
> only
> regret is that the positions of other Governements/Coporations cannot
> be
> also debated, due to the current US DNS dominance. I would certainly
> comment the French, Chinese, Iraqi positions the same as I comment the
> US
> ones, should their Gov be permitted to share the reponsibilities they
> own
> (on my opinion and experience) in the root matrix. And I only fear the
> day
> they take over their rights and responsiblities if this is not
> concerted.
>
> The ICANN delegation to a country Manager is per se an highly
> disputable
> issue over what is the legitimate process to decide who is the Trustee
> of a
> national internet community. But, going farther in disputing internal
> national communities issues, despising peoples and languages, foreign
> ad
> hominem on national participants, all the more with uncertain or
> controverted competence, should be prevented by all means.
>
> I know we are used to Hugh's and Jeff's mails. But the GNSO/GA list is
> the
> last remaining ICANN list we can use. I see the day when one of them
> will
> be used by ICANN as a pretext to close this list.
> jfc
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 17:12 05/06/04, Hugh Dierker said:
>
> >Just as I suspected there are none.  We have seen men like you
> operate the
> >are called ICANN.  I pray for the Iraqis who go without while you
> play
> >politics.
> >Eric
> >
> >"Asaad Y. Alnajjar, P.E. - Millennium Inc." <asaad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >You don't need to look too far, the answer has always been around you
> and
> >known to the many whom are involved in ccTLD issues. It is out there
> in
> >Arabic & English, so find it.
> >
> >Besides, this issue is for Iraqis to decide on and it is being worked
> by
> >the concerned parties.
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <mailto:hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>Hugh Dierker
> >To: <mailto:ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 5:44 PM
> >Subject: [ga] dotIQ
> >
> >Can anyone on this list point me to any evidence of anyone applying
> to
> >manage the dotIQ cctTLD? I think not. I have received some responses
> to my
> >inquiries and have been asked "who wants to and can run it?" I have
> >searched and find no such evidence. Perhaps it is in Arabic. I note
> that
> >the ISO has the country code listed in English. Very interesting
> someone
> >complained of this yet no one has been denied the right of assignment
> of
> >management. I cannot imagine that some rich ex-patriates would not
> want to
> >pay for and stand up for this very valuable tool while rebuilding
> their
> >homeland. Someone must want to stand up to the plate rather than just
>
> >complain about outside influence.
> >
> >
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >Friends. Fun. <http://messenger.yahoo.com/>Try the all-new Yahoo!
> Messenger
> >
> >
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >Friends. Fun. <http://messenger.yahoo.com/>Try the all-new Yahoo!
> Messenger
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"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.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827