RE: [ga] Archives of VeriSign's Domain Policy Mailing List
I personally made that fact known but I will not argue with either of
you about it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Corliss [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 4:41 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck
> Cc: [ga]; Brian O'Shaughnessy, Verisign
> Subject: Re: [ga] Archives of VeriSign's Domain Policy Mailing List
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:47:59 -0800, William X Walsh wrote:
> > Tuesday, Tuesday, January 08, 2002, 12:46:14 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > > Patrick,
> > > We made it very clear that the decision made with regard
> to the Domain
> > > Policy List was made for legal reasons. You may disagree with our
> > > counsel but we pay them to protect us so we listen to
> them when they
> > > speak. If that is FUD, so be it. I call that sound
> business practice.
> > Ah, but no, Verisign never made that clear. As a matter of fact,
> > Verisign REPEATEDLY denied, to both us and to the press, that legal
> > issues had anything to do with the closure of that list,
> and insisted
> > it was a coincidence.
> Hi Chuck
> I think I must agree with William X. Walsh here. In fact I
> already posted the
> notification from Tom Newell dated Tue, 24 May 0101 11:13:49
> -0400. This
> > This list will be closed effective immediately. When
> > we started the list many years ago, there were no lists
> > specifically focusing on domain policy issues. Today
> > there are a wide range of public lists that address
> > this topic.
> There is no indication here that the list was closed for
> legal reasons.
> However, I'm afraid you completely missed the point. I was
> not referring to
> the closure of the list as "misinformational" but to Tom's
> last paragraph
> which said:
> > Please refer all queries to Brian O'Shaughnessy, of
> > VeriSign's Corporate Communications department at
> > email@example.com.
> I did this, Chuck, and got no reply. Why was that?
> Why say "refer all queries to Brian O'Shaughnessy" when you
> apparently have no
> intention of replying to those queries. In fact I can give
> similar examples
> of non-responses from other VeriSign officers. And that's
> without even
> talking about VeriSign's "expired names" policies.
> In fact, my query went to the heart of the most fundamental
> aspect of a
> mailing list viz. could VeriSign allow us to have access to
> the mailing list
> With or without the contentious emails.
> Best regards
> Patrick Corliss