Re: [wg-review] Clarifications requested from BoD, Staff, NC, TC,Chair prior to co-Chair elections

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 09:53:49PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
[...]
> Am I correct, in ,my understanding,

This is a typical preamble to a deliberate misstatement of someone's 
position, so that you can accuse someone of saying something they 
didn't say...I of course know that you had no such intention, and are 
just honestly confused... ;-)

> that Kent contends that individuals,
> including those who have been wronged, should not have a say in the
> DNSO, and, in the operations of the domain name system, thus, doubly
> wronging them?

You need to read a little more carefully: That is not at all the meaning
of what what I said.  What I said was that it shouldn't be the case that
the ones who think they are "wronged" are the *only* ones with any say. 

This is obviously true: to see that, consider a criminal justice system
that was controlled only by those who thought that the criminal justice
system wronged them.  That would be, in effect, a criminal justice
system that was controlled by criminals, and, while you could be sure 
that the rights of criminals would be heavily considered, the rights of 
ordinary citizens would not.

I know that some will have trouble with the above example and will
misinterpret it, so let me deal with that: what I said above does *not*
say that those who think they are wronged by the UDRP are criminals, nor
does it imply that.  And of course, the UDRP is not a criminal justice
system at all -- it is a way of resolving civil disputes, etc etc.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html