DNSO Mailling lists archives


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

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

At 03:28 10/05/01 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
>Joop has seen fit to hold the IDNO up as an example of "democracy" as
>he sees it.
Yes, it was set up to be more democratic, accountable and transparent that any other constituency.
The exercise has also exposed the weaknesses inherent in "on-line" democracy. The excessive power of  a single dissenting individual with too much time on his hands.

>The vigorous opposition to the IDNO does NOT come from those who
>oppose an individual's constituency, but in fact from some of those
>who have most loudly campaigned for one.
Who?  People who argued that a constituency could not be an organization?  "Vigourous opposition" from 3 votes against 43 that ratified the Charter?
>The IDNO is not the example of democracy that it's founder wants to
>portray it as.


And if he insists on pursuing this line of argument,
>then the entire mess will be documented here in response to these
>false claims.
I think it is about time that the public sees this "documentation". Substantiate or lose all credibility. Not here on the GA list, to respect Patric and those who are sick of this, but on ga-ext.

Threatening to expose a "mess" , but NEVER substantiating is a tired tactic. It has been going on for over 18 months.
Convincing people that you are right and that the majority is wrong cannot be done by simply counting on "IDNO fatigue".

>Rehashing this argument right now is most certainly NOT in the best
>interests of getting a domain name holder's constituency acted on, but
>rallying support for the IDNO as the example for that constituency is
>also not in the bests interests of a real constituency along those
>Joop needs to ask himself if the personal glory he seeks through the
>IDNO is worth the price of having this argument again,

Everybody will be served by the truth prevailing.  I have nothing to hide or fear.  Everything is on Public Record. 
No matter what shape an IC will finally take, and no matter who the personalities in it will be,  it will always be the same issues that need addressing: representativity and fair majority rule.

and if in fact
>he wants to see the effort to get an individual's constituency harmed
>by his insistence on his personal agenda over the interests of
>actually getting this constituency concept advanced further than it
>has in the past.
>Make no mistake about it.  The approval of the IDNO as the domain
>holders constituency, even in spirit, would not be in the best
>interests of those whom it claims to want to represent.  And thus
>those who believe in doing what is best for those domain holders will
>oppose it vociferously.

If  WXW believed in doing what is best for Individual DN holders, why does he not work on a competing organization to represent them?  Why did he stay as a member inside the IDNO that he publicly denounced at every opportunity?  Posting 80% or more of the list traffic? Making nuisance motions and calling for resignations? Obstructing only, but never constructing?

I say: let the majority decide who convinces them on the best way forward for an IC.

If others will kindly move this discussion to ga-ext, I will only post there.

Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
Developer of    The Polling Booth

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