[ga] right and wrong

[eric@hi-tek.com]

Well it is time for your weekly dose of moralism.

In all cultures and religious venues from the beginning of history,
there have been maxims which have transcended development of thought. 
Keeping ones' word and not lying.  Upon these rest reliability and
stability.  Accessibility necessarily flows from these.  There is a
glitch in this theme; "the king can do no wrong".

Where are we now with ICANN?  Certainly it is not about reliability and
stability and accessibility is surely diminished.  Somehow we have
wondered from the keeping of ones' word and have begun that horrible
pathos of lying.
(I do not care what others say I am a member of ICANN and bare great
responsibility for these failings.  I have not kept others from losing
contact with what is right)

Where do we go from here?  Are we correct to feed a beast that has shown
complete hatefullness for societal norms of truth and honor?  Are we
empowered to slay such a beast in the name of right?  If we take a
farmers' crazed oxen because it has trampled a man, we must be obligated
then to till the farmers' field.  Or if we chose to take the farmer then
we must tend to his family. Is Karl right to sue, Is Jamie right to push
a rebid? Who will tend to the field and family if they are successful?

Reform of someone or something is a good idea.  But as any judge
anywhere in the world can tell you, reform cannot come without
repentance.  Our BoD admits no wrong, therefor it cannot repent,
therefor it cannot reform. (if you do not believe me ask Luther) So we
must view ICANNs' reform as excuse and evasion as opposed to honest
reformation.

As to the WLS.  Some would think that such a technical matter is outside
morality, they would be severely wrong. Thou shall not steal, is in as
many cultural concepts as not lying.  The way things are run now it is
obviscated theft, which requires lying and stealing.  It is abhorrent to
reliability, stability and accessibility.

Danny's' reference to communism is innaccurate at first blush, but upon
reflection is correct.  The theory of communism is good, but when evil
people usurp the power of the people it becomes evil.

The road to hell is filled with good intentions.  Perhaps TR has good
intentions.  Blocking the showing of the will of the people leads to
nasty results.  Why does one oppose regular consistent voting on matters
of public interest?  Certainly we all laugh at the juxtaposition and
historical metaphor regarding verification and technical feasibility and
cost regarding voting as what Hitler and so many other hateful fascists
have used to deny a proper popular vote.  Because this is the Internet
it is different?  I think not.

We are soon to be faced with the challenges of globalization.  Only
personalized representation without economic interest will save us from
that cross.

No Cross No Crown.  The internet effects too many lives and too many
realities to pretend that we may operate in a moral vacuum.  My Navajo
friends know how to laugh and cry at the same time when lack of good
results in agony.  Because of course it does.  We reap what we sew.

We must redouble our efforts and rekindle our spirit and work harder and
smarter to provide accessibility, reliability and stability to this
communication device.

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