Re: [ga] which battlefield?
Your belief that if ICANN is just ignored it will go away or somehow
fall is just plain unrealistic.
If that is what you truly believe, then why are you still here?
Thursday, Thursday, March 14, 2002, 5:31:51 PM, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> Dear all,
> don't you believe the ICANN has mislead us into a lot of false problems,
> delaying the development of the Internet?
> If you agree with this, I would suggest you do not to try to focus on
> reforms (others will do that very well too). Better you to focus on the
> after ICANN, with a vision which may benefit to all.
> Most of the people having to decide about the fate of the ICANN are not
> interested in details, but in simple questions and responses. Will we keep
> it or not. If yes, what reforms. If not what replacement. So the reforms
> are only 25% of the debate and not the most important part.
> Lynn's management by surprise consists in choosing his battle fields. At
> Senate hearings - as at the GAC - he was/will be imposed the battlefield.
> We are better to be trained for the proper ones than to be muddled in the
> wrong ones.
> This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
> Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
William X Walsh <firstname.lastname@example.org>
"There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
interprets the truth."
-- Jean Giradoux
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html