<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] Increased foreign attendance
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [ga] Increased foreign attendance
- From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=vs4r+zB4RoVN6f1ueVV74L7nI7AdzChLDrnHjO91NBiTxCXeok2hrv0l5MMMYUJ9UOKeVYEmM4xBxaiUfhFIqZonDAcRGq7wvZxMaSsE1LRUNN5fRH2im8jZZicjKhFqspiwNyqyy+741hXQuvi5sehqDEyCoauNCkTU3Pfjd0I=;
- In-reply-to: <4683fa67.1d1d640a.6e95.40d2@mx.google.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
--- veni markovski <veni@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> At 09:54 6/28/2007 -0700, George Kirikos wrote:
> >Don't expect anything but cheerleading from Veni.
>
> George,
> I hope that you could take the personal attacks off the list, and
> instead of wasting your (and every of the readers') time, you could
> contribute something positively? That is, of course, unless you
> consider personal attacks as a positive contribution :)
>
> As I have said many times, personal attacks do not have influence
> upon me, my views, or my expressions. I have been on the Internet for
> long enough to ignore them, and to continue to ask - especially the
> people who address such attacks - to see something posititve in their
> contribution. As for the personal attacks - I am sure you know that
> they only expose the lack of arguments on the substance. I don't
> remember naming anyone of these "us", who were mentioned here, and I
> keep talking to people who, under other circumstances, would not
> deserve my attention.
This was not a "personal attack", but an accurate observation -- try to
find *any* statement by you that is negative towards ICANN. That's the
definition of cheerleader. Your "mantra" about people making "positive
contributions" is just a tired smokescreen, as everyone here knows, to
try to give yourself justification for ignoring people that you want to
ignore. When 99%+ of people logically are against something (e.g.
VeriSign contracts, .biz/info/org contracts), you ignore them. You see
only what you want to see.
For someone who only a few posts ago scolded "old timers" it is ironic
you would use the phrase "I have been on the internet long
enough......" Expecting logical consistency from you within a matter of
hours, though, isn't something I would expect. I know better.
As for my contribution, just ask the boys at Neustar or Affilias/PIR
whether I had an impact in ceasing their tiered/differential pricing
proposal that they tried to sneak through, or others in the Business
Constituency whether I'm doing a good job or not. I'll be remembered in
a positive light for my contributions. What have you done? Raised
prices for registrants? Given sweetheart deals to registries? Oh, and
brought a Verisign Regional Internet Resolution site to Bulgaria:
http://www.verisign.com/verisign-inc/news-and-events/news-archive/us-news-2006/page_038483.html
Great job, Veni.
Fact is, the money wasted giving people free vacations and tickets to
the ICANN circus could have been refunded to registrants. Or,
alternatively, 90% of it could have been returned to registrants, and
10% spent on something like www.webex.com, to boost remote
participation.
Spending money wisely? Not in ICANN's mission.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|