DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re[2]: [ga-ext] Re: [ga] The IC constituency building results so far [was: stuff]

Hello NameCritic,

Thursday, May 10, 2001, 12:48:39 PM, NameCritic wrote:

> Why? I see a lot of people saying it is all for Joop's personal glory. I
> hear you say the IDNO has a terrible history. I hear you say it would be a
> bad choice. Tell me why. I want to know. Obviously a lot of work has gone
> into this. Is there another organization you think would be better? Do you
> think we should form a brand new one from scratch? Again, why if much of the
> work has already been done? Is the reason many want to start a new one due
> to ego? Is it because your names aren't on the list of Founders?

> I'm not a member of the IDNO, but you all want to shoot it down citing vague
> reasons, without ever stating the actual reasons. Educate me.

Chris, the reasons are available to you.  You can easily find them

The entire reason I issued the warning I did in that message is
because it also doesn't serve the best interests of getting a domain
holders constituency to rehash that history on a public list at this
point, provided that the entire IDNO issue remains where it belongs,
in the past.

Best regards,
William X Walsh
Owner, Userfriendly.com
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net

This message was passed to you via the ga-ext@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-ext" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>