RE: Re: [ga] collisions in namespace (was gTLD Constituency)
> From: William X. Walsh [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 11:14 AM
> Hello Roeland,
> Thursday, April 12, 2001, 11:09:53 AM, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> >> From: William X. Walsh [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> >> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 10:52 AM
> >> Thursday, April 12, 2001, 9:14:28 AM, Christopher Ambler wrote:
> >> > After which three other directors expressed agreement,
> and then a
> >> > majority voted to agree with him not one, but FOUR times under
> >> > different wordings.
> >> > By any criteria, it stood the test.
> >> This is a mischaracterization. One director had a
> problem, the others
> >> did not state their reasons, just agreeing with the outcome for
> >> whatever reason.
That is not correct. They stated their issues clearly, in the surrounding
discussion. It took quite a while, as I recall. I was rather impressed with
the way Vint Cerf managed the discussion. There was no doubt, afterward,
what decision was made and why, only in your mind.
> > You weren't there William, Chris is right. Four times, they
> were asked and
> > they answered the same.
> What were they asked? They were asked if they wanted to defer
> approval of a .web registry, not specifically if that reason was
> because of the existence of IOD's existing registration system.
Actually, see above, IOD's existing business was EXACTLY the reason it was
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