Re: [ga] [Fwd: [address-policy-wg] ICANN Ratifies Global Policy for Allocation of IPv6 Address Space]

[Veni Markovski <veni@xxxxxxxx>]

Actually Thomas did listen here (as I do), and responded with 
information which you didn't have. Or if you have, you didn't use. 
Then he was immediately attacked. See below.


---start quote
At 10:15 PM 13.9.2006 '?.'  -0400, kidsearch wrote:
Michael as I said before, I respect your opinion. And have done so with
others, but do not easily sit still when being condescended to as if someone
from ICANN is doing us a big favor by listening. That is what they are
supposed to be doing. If they came in with that attitude rather than
assuming they know more than everyone else and acting as if every dissenting
opinion is a personal attack, then it might not happen. Respect goes two
ways. They can give some to get some. Ignoring everything that is produced
here as if it were not worth listening to or as if they were doing us some
huge favor by listing is not a show of respect.
---end quote

So, now you deny the right of the people on the board (not only 
directors, but also liasions) to speak. They should be only 
listening! How generous of you, thanks for letting us do that. Can we 
also breathe? Thanks for that.

Let me remind you the three steps how you reached to this:

1. Karl wrote an e-mail...

> Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > I got the impression that no one on the board actually read this policy
> > - it is not only vague and subjective, but also has internal references
> > that are dangling.  Like what is "Item A"?

2. ...To which Thomas responded...

> Boy, comments like this sure are constructive and do much to encourage
> one to participate here. (ha!)
>
> Give the board a little more credit than this. Of course the policy
> was read. And discussed.
>
> BTW, SSAC reviewed it. Their report is available here:
>
> 
http://www.icann.org/committees/security/IPv6-communication-to-ICANN-board-11aug2006.pdf
>
> There were other supporting documents, not sure right off if they are
> available or where they would be (e.g., there is one from the ASO
> chair).
>

3. ... And he got the following attack from Chris:

>Oh yes Thomas, we forgot how grateful we should be that you grace us with
>your presence every time you post. Please allow me this opportunity to say
>what a wonderful contribution you have made and how much we all appreciate
>you coming here and spending any of your valuable time with those here who
>are only on the list to waste the time of such important people like
>yourself.

...which was followed by similar attacks by others. There seem to be 
some instinct in some of the people here. If a Board member responds, 
that like showing the red color to the bull.

veni