[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [discuss] FW: Re: S. 705
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 15:22:34 -0400, Milton Mueller <email@example.com>
>Kent Crispin wrote:
>> In fact, Joop's attack on Dave and I was a pure matter of his
>> personal dislike,
>This is not correct. The issue, as I recall, was whether your participation would be
>predicated on support for the idea of an individual constituency. Nothing personal about
>that. You may also recall that I and others spoke up against excluding you from the
>list. And correct me if I am wrong, but the end result was that you have not, in fact,
>been excluded from the list.
>> buttressed by truly offensive posts from Roeland
>> Meyer, constant antagonism from William Walsh,
>This is true. Their participation was at a very low level and consisted of personal
>attacks. But Joop and the IDNO members are not responsible for that.
I take exception to that. My posts consistently were nothing more
than an attempt to get Kent and Dave to address the question of
whether he opposed or supported the creation of the constituency and
the goals of the IDNO, and if not, what purpose he felt he had in
being a participant on the list. Nothing more. Do not buy into
Kent's continue "coloring" that he has become so famous for.
William X. Walsh
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Fax:(209) 671-7934
The Law is not your mommy or daddy to go crying
to every time you have something to whimper about.