Re: A point of agreement (Re: [ga-roots] response to responseto response)

["L Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

On 29 May 2001, at 21:13, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> At 13:58 29.05.2001 -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
> >Harald, surely you jest.
> >
> >Are you saying that if ICANN doesn't recognize the existence
> >of name conflicts they don't exist? This is the "bury the head in
> >the sand" attitude that Peter de Blanc and I were trying to
> >avoid by raising this issue.
> 
> PLEASE......
> 
> If ICANN does not allow conflicts between the names it has approved, it has
> no conflicts between the names it has approved. That is the ONLY thing I
> said about conflicts in the ICANN regime. Is English really that
> difficult???????

Sheesh!  It is precisely the point!  ICANN's keeping its head in the sand 
wrt avoidance of the issue is going to cause the problem.  It is the 
semantics that avoid the issue, Harald.  This stubborn refusal to insist 
that if ICANN ignores the collision it won't exist.  In the end, it won't 
matter WHAT argument you use.  The issue is there, will remain there 
and will cause problems.  The closer ICANN gets to controlling the root, 
the closer it gets to anti-trust as well.  Perhaps it will take chaos for 
everyone to see it.  

So, just keep talking while the DNS breaks.  Move ahead toward the 
cliffs.

Leah

> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html