[discuss] List membership management
joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com
Mon May 5 15:21:42 UTC 2014
The answer is to create a neutral set of rules that apply to all equally
in participation. If one of the rules is that participation must be
direct and not through proxy servers so be it. That precludes no
opinions from being shared. But let us finish with this topic of
mechanics once and for all. A complete and transparent set of rules for
participation and use of the list is needed.
On 5/4/2014 7:46 PM, Michel Gauthier wrote:
> At 22:40 04/05/2014, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> You seem to believe that "fsp4net" represents something real. What
>> do you have for that belief
>> I know that it comes from JFC's computer:
> All the more surprising than JFC has documented he was initiating
> fsp4.net as multistakholders group distrusting ICANN, that he had to
> initially host their contributions, more over ICANN discriminates
> their MS group mail address (after his machine, that you designate to
> hackers has been ... hacked)..
> Actually, I fear you are being used with Andrew Sullivan by the still
> small fsp4net alliance. They campaign to show that ICANN, supported by
> IETF people from this list, filters its MS process and discriminates
> among stakeholders. And tell fairy tales about VGNs (cf. your mails)
> as no one will believe you do not know what they are.
> They have given their https://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox access to
> many people for them to check that they can register
> alliance.fsp4net at gmail.com on /1NET and NTIAtransition without any
> Their target is to expose thar (1) either the NTIA strategy is
> deliberately biaised, or they have to change their mind about ICANN ,
> (2) ICANN fears the VGN concept and only react in being rude and
> non-democratic, and (3) the whole issue at stake is the ICANN sole,
> unique, authoritative VGN vs. billions of people's, professionnal,
> non-profit, corporate, local, regional, national VGNs.
> I must say things are very easy for them: look at the way you help
> truth in your iast mail:.
> At 00:40 05/05/2014, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> On 05/05/2014 09:59, Avri Doria wrote:
>> > On 04-May-14 16:55, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> >> That said, it's hard to disagree, but I remain concerned that the
>> >> operators have a vested interest
>> > All of the interested parties have a vested interest by definition.
>> I specifically meant a financial interest, in a way that non-profit
>> organisations don't have (or at least, shouldn't have). Some registries
>> are very much for-profit.
> Their alliance is for private persons, professionnals, non-profits
> explaining they distrust ICANN, because ICANN seems to only be
> interested by profit and financial interests. And you confirm it!
> They only have to quote you ...
>> >> and that the voice of the users of DNS
>> >> registrar services should be heard somehow.
>> > Couldn't the users be represented by representatives of the ICANN Non
>> > Contracted Parties of the GNSO (registrants and users), ICANN the
>> > At-Large users and the ISOC organizational and chapter members?
>> They could indeed. I'd just like to see it made explicit.
> As a vested group of multiple akeholders worrying about their
> *independent use* of the Internet they are denied participation to the
> IG supposedly open ICANN MS process. Now you want them to be replaced
> by ICANN and ISOC registrants and end-users ....
> This IS what they want you to tell, so they can show the whole NTIA
> project (including the Techies) is biased and that an MS process
> implying ICANN cannot be trusted more than the NSA.
> I think I betray no secret (they published egistered me on their list)
> in telling that their primary target is to show there is a real threat
> on the digital ecosystem that demands Europe and States to enact their
> precautionary obligations.
> M G
> FYI the old telepresse information system since 2000 uses a old tool
> taking advantage from the Eudora Mail Agent file architecture, we plan
> to change when the IETF work on JSON will be completed. So, you will
> find several people still using Eudora 7. Works well: as well as the
> old JFCnet VGN that worries you so much.
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
More information about the discuss