[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [discuss] Individual representation
OK. Maybe we are getting somewhere .
Can you now try to explain *why* in your opinion it is irrelevant? Why is
the disenfranchisement of the very type of people who designed the
Internet "irrelevant" to the discussion of the flaws of a proposed
governance structure for "technical" issues (or more).
On Sun, 27 Jun 1999, Randy Bush wrote:
> > Agreed. It means the academic employees -- the academics (NOT the
> > "academic institutions") -- are disenfranchised. Which was my point and
> > Ellen's, and which neither of us seems to be able to put in terms you will
> > grok.
> i understand it. but it is quite irrelevant. the same applies to the isp
> employees, the commercial institution employees, ...
> some decades a friend in an ansi and iso committee used to have an attack
> walrus to eat red herrings. i have always thought i should have bred it.
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | email@example.com
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
--> It's hot here. <--