Re: [ga] gTLD Constituency
You're right, Dave.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Christopher Ambler" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] gTLD Constituency
> At 01:27 PM 4/10/2001, Christopher Ambler wrote:
> >The point is clear - the gTLD registry constituency should
> >include all those with pending applications that have not
> >been turned down. I've made my points and you've made
> Your PREFERENCE is clear. The BASIS for it is not, since you have not
> provided one.
> >I think it's very clear to all involved, and I have no desire
> >to argue the point with you any longer. Much like others on
> >this list, I'm going to take your advice to heart and just
> >stop replying to obvious baiting and diversion.
> Unfortunately this represents a common pattern in discussions on these
> lists: Someone puts forward a position and then, ultimately, fails to
> engage in serious discussion about the implications and weaknesses of the
> The social contract for problem solving in public discussions is to pursue
> matters for group understanding. When a participant reacts to criticism of
> their ideas by declaring that a critic is somehow at fault, the participant
> violates their part of the contract, turning the process into one of pure
> power rather than group understanding and consensus.
> Dave Crocker <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> tel: +1.408.246.8253; fax: +1.408.273.6464
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html