[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[registrars] Too much noise from Canada indeed

It appears that reasonable people do not agree. I mostly recall a strong
disagreement between Tucows and some others, on one side, versus the view of
NSI/Core/Palage that the process is unfolding as it should, or as it must,
in favour of greater protection of IP interests. That difference of opinion
remains, and ad hominem argument - of it is argument- will not resolve it. I
recall some very strong language from some parties.
Every effort was made to let you have your say Mr Connelly.

We at Tucows are very concerned that compromise is being engaged in at
levels and forums well before it is timely. What are the interests of
registrars? That for us is the question. Today some progress was made
towards sorting that issue out. Tucows took the initiative to have the first
collective deliberation of registrars outside of the context of Cairo and
physical meetings. Did anyone else offer to do this?

Mostly my job as chairman was to let everyone have a say when fundamental
disagreement existed between strong minded people. Everyone did have a say.
Everyone was systematically canvassed, over some vigorous shouting.

Your dyspeptic remarks are noted, for what they are worth. It should not be
necessary to remark that the Internet is a world wide system of
communication. "Too much noise from Canada" indeed. Try to imagine what you
sound like!


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Robert F. Connelly
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 9:16 PM
To: Registrars List
Subject: [registrars] Too much noise from Canada

At 09:37 26-04-2000 +1000, Erica Roberts wrote:
>To avoid any future recurrence,  contact information  should be  provided
>in advance in the future.

Dear Erica:

Here, here.  I went to bed at about 23:00 still not knowing what the number
was to be.  I got up at 04:45, having left my machine booted.  I found the
number at 04:55, called in at 04:59 and at least two persons were already
in the conference, Tim and Michael.

In my opinion, Timothy is not a valuable resource four our
deliberations:-{  He attempted (very successfully) to dominate the
discussion, force his opinions on others.  Meeting was badly held, Roger
talked too much, Lauren talked too much (as usual, even when she did not
know quite what to say and was struggling to think what her position should
be, she talked on for over two minutes when others were standing in line --
and *knew* what they wanted to say).

Timothy is new to the field and lacks adequate background of where we have
already been, what compromises have already been made.  He should not be
leading the discussion.

Michael was much more attuned to the feelings of the group.  He stated to
summarize what he had heard said and Timothy tried to shut him down.

It was not a good meeting -- but you certainly should have been there.

Personal regards,