[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] nominations
On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 Dnsipv6@aol.com wrote:
> Joe and everyone else,
> I don't see a "Richard" either. Is this Randy guy a nut or
> something? Sure seems like it!
Oh no, Randy's ok. He's not a nut. It's just that Robert Shaw of the ITU
(International Telecommunications Union) slandered and libeled us a week
or so ago. He claimed we were spies operating on behalf of Network
Solution Inc. (the dot.com people).
I think randy is reffering to my ISP provider vrx.net, which is run by a
Mr. Richard Sexton, who has (I think) consulted to NSI in the past. I'm
not sure on the last one, Richard business is not my business. All I can
tell you is that we've had different ISP's, and richard is an ISP's ISP,
if you know what I mean. He's reliable and very professional.
I can assure you we are not spy's for NSI.
Unfortunately people are making fools of themselves by believing this
trash. Mr. Shaw is a middle level international civil servant, pretty
well protected in his position. he's a member of the GAC, which is the
government advisory committee to ICANN.
So, until we get some form of official retraction, were going to have to
live with the fact that we have been labeled NSI Family Spies.
Those in the know will remember that when NSI was assigned the position of
Internic, there were various rumours at that time that they were given the
Internic as a retirement gift for NSF spies. Esther Dyson and Michael
Roberts two officers of ICANN have also been labeled in various
disscussion groups as cia and military intellegence, respectively.
Being a part of the GA is like being on an X Files episode. If you make a
difference, no problem - your a spy. I'm beginning to feel it's an
> In a message dated 99-09-19 22:52:47 EDT, you write:
> << Subj: Re: [ga] nominations
> Date: 99-09-19 22:52:47 EDT
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org (J. Baptista)
> Sender: email@example.com
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org (Randy Bush)
> CC: email@example.com (Sr. Francisco Fanego), firstname.lastname@example.org
> Randy, it's Joe and Frank here. I don't see Richard, do you see Richard?
> In any event, it's you maybe happy with icann's finances, I'm not. I want
> to know why it's costing us 5 million to run a rinky dink operation which
> only requires 600,000/yr. So if your happy with an operating increase of
> 830% may I suggest you stay out of financial discussions. I don't think
> your qualified here, the art department is done the hall, engineering in
> the rear.
> Sorry Randy, but this is a critical issue. 5 million today, 500 million
> tommorrow, that is the nature of governing bodies.
> Joe Baptista
> On Sun, 19 Sep 1999, Randy Bush wrote:
> > > Is ICANN accountable to me and the internet community - or is it
> > > accountable to the doc? If it's accountable to me and the internet
> > > community, I want to see that accountability in the form of a financial
> > > statement.
> > >
> > > If ICANN is accountable and run by the DOC, then I have a right to access
> > > that information via an FOI request. It damed if you do and damed if you
> > > don't either way.
> > talking to yourself again, richard? and you still don't make much sense.
> > i already know more than i care about icann's finances. the issue to me is
> > getting enough sane folk on the board to plan and budget sensibly. and
> > standing around bitching and moaning does not strike me as a productive way
> > to do so. in fact, it seems the opposite, to be distraction action. but
> > this is not new for you, is it.
> > randy
> David "Dude" Jenson
Planet Communication & Computing Facility email@example.com
Public Access Internet Research Publisher 1 (212) 894-3704 ext. 1033