RE: Re: [ga] Letter from ICANN to New.net
> From: William X. Walsh [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 8:10 AM
> Hello Roeland,
> Friday, July 27, 2001, 7:59:49 AM, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> >> Wrong. Go back and check with your ORSC croonies. One of
> their big
> >> complaints with new.net when it started was the conflicting TLDs.
> > MDR happened in Nov00, NewNet hadn't announced existance yet. ICANN
> > conflicted, with BIZ, in Nov00. That was the signal that it
> was okay for
> > NewNet to also conflict. Why not? If ICANN can ignore the
> ORSC then NewNet
> > has no reason to acknowlege the ICANN. The facts are that
> NewNet didn't
> > conflict because they didn't exist at the time.
> New.net's TLDs were not in conflict with ICANN's TLDs, Roeland. As I
> said, go back and check your facts. You may have been physically
> present in MDR, but that doesn't confer on you any greater right to
> state non-facts as truth.
The last I heard, INFO was in the NewNet TLD list, at the time they went
live. In fact, I noted a number of TLDs that conflicted with the ICANN
proposed TLDs, at that time.
> I'm already banned. My posts only go to ga-full, so there is nothing
> to complain about :)
That explains a lot. However, it appears that you can still post to the
But, it appears that my count was further off than I thought, yesterday.
Further, I just wasted two postings to you.<sigh>
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