Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz contract

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, Veni, wouldn't want to discuss the past or learn from it. That would be
a bad thing. Once ICANN weathers the storm and goes against everything theat
individual users suggested, then ICANN wants it to go away. Thats what it
sounds like.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Veni Markovski" <veni@xxxxxxxx>
To: "Elmar Knipp" <Elmar.Knipp@xxxxxxxx>; "Veni Markovski" <veni@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz
contract


> At 02:37 PM 03.8.2006 '?.'  +0200, Elmar Knipp wrote:
>
> >You have made it some months ago in the context of the .com
> >agreement. In my view, the community has given many (diverse)
> >solutions here. The majority of the constituencies had made clear
> >statements including solutions (most of them against the agreement).
> >To hear from you such statement again is frustrating. Perhaps it is
> >in the nature of people to regognize only what they like to hear.
>
> Actually your own statement is a proof that it is in the nature of
> people to not recognize what they don't like to hear.
> And, by the way, someone has said after one of the ICANN's decisions,
> "Fine. Now, let's forget about this, and move forward." I don't
> remember who exactly said that, but it makes a lot of sense.
> Otherwise we will have to spend all our time discussing the same old
things.
>
> veni
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.5/406 - Release Date: 8/2/06
>
>