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

Re: [discuss] Individual representation

>>> 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, ...
> The interests of a university as an institution or the university as a 
> .edu name owner are wholly distinct from the interests of the academics 
> who are employees of the university. Why allow an administrator who cares 
> about .edu domain policy to participate, while leaving behind the 
> trademark experts from the law school, theoriticians from the school of 
> government, and the protocol experts from the engineering school, to but 
> a few obvious examples.
> The point you're advocating is akin to taking the library and the 
> bookshelves, but leaving the books behind. 

we all think we're sooooo special and different.