<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] paradigm stooge?
- To: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [ga] paradigm stooge?
- From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 23:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=i3+W4bRZHOcr0nRjRw/Dx3ooJUotRONeNw8mS6NRaGt1ahxGgxSuBDBRIJWwZnB+G+BQyWeLzZIGfIMnqK1g+rhevMewIf7qS9Zsw2UQ/Bz23xX/kKy8hVe89Nv+amlI5Ed9BGIX7d+633sRBEjWjvII2t46BxK3m0JXlJ6zWG8= ;
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Who was it that said he was in such interest of a proper paradigm until he listed a gaggle of voices and then when a consesus was suggested against ICANN interests, did a vanishing act of the concept?
Who was it that handpicked who he would debate with and then uses pure sophistry to difuse the strawmen he sets up?
Who now misnomers verticle monopolies as tiering activiity and sets the same strawmen up to sophisticatedly dismiss their arguments as correct yet wrong without ever even saying a word on his own and yet speaks for no one but himself?
And who joins him with a little shove?
I am really starting to smell a rat in my bilge. Time to flush it out.
e
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|