<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">The one non-silly observation she made in her rather befuddled testimony was that there is a "shortage of space in people's heads." Well, at least some people's. This apparently prevents the entry of new information that doesn't map with the biases adopted when she disappeared a decade ago, e.g. the 1) Affirmation of Commitments process, which provides for collective assessment by and accountability to all stakeholders involved, including governments; 2) the greatly rebalanced relationship between the GAC and the board; 3) the growing institutional role of the ALAC's whose marginalization she decries; 4) the effective presence of other centers of public interest advocacy like the NCUC; and so on…it's not 2002 anymore. Really, it's not.<div><br></div><div>As for the new gTLD program itself, it is a bit of a stretch to suggest that "many or most of the new registrations will be defensive. <a href="http://Marriott.com">Marriott.com</a>, for example, works fine; why do they need marriott.hotels except defensively? (Or why do they need to own .marriott?)" One can think of a whole bunch of ways big multinational companies will find it useful to develop their own self-managed ecosystems. Would they put up the !85$ at the front end and a half million or more per annum to run a registry just to make sure that someone else doesn't take the name? And who would——will a spammer or squatter try to lay out that kind of cash, particularly when the proposals will have to go through an elaborate and demanding approval process that entails mechanisms for objections based on legally rights and other relevant criteria? She might want to read the Applicant Guidebook and see how the process works. There are ways of dealing with second levels too that would seem well within the grasp of an organization like Marriot.</div><div><br></div><div>As for the claim that "In the end, new domain names are somewhat like derivatives: They add complexity and transactions and lots of rights and obligations without actually creating anything of value—" this is a pretty strong ex ante supposition. Since she apparently hasn't thought about how people might actually use TLDs and what that might mean in terms of stimulating activity throughout the ecosystem, it's nothing more than a good sound bite.</div><div><br></div><div>Jay Rockefeller concluded that “I think we’ll have to get used to .hotel, I think we’ll have to get used to .auto.” If a 74 year old Senator can handle the terrifying "confusion," hopefully Esther Dyson and the trademark lobby will find a way to get out bed irrespective and use search tools to navigate to the sites they want.</div><div><br></div><div>Bill</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div>
</div>
<br><div><div>On Dec 13, 2011, at 11:12 AM, michael gurstein wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<title>Message</title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16437">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Esther Dyson</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:edyson@edventure.com">edyson@edventure.com</a>></span><br>Date:
Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:17 AM<br>Subject: Re: [IP] ICANN What’s the .rush? - The
Washington Post<br>To: David Farber <<a href="mailto:dave@farber.net">dave@farber.net</a>><br>Cc: ip <<a href="mailto:ip@listbox.com">ip@listbox.com</a>><br><br><br>
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word">Dave -
<div><br></div>
<div>Thanks so much for reposting this. I know everyone is concerned (and
justly) about SOPA right now, but ICANN is unaccountable to anyone except its
own coterie of registries, registrars, trademark lawyers. In theory, it's
accountable to the public, but the public pays no attention.... So, everyone,
please pay attention! In 5 years, people will use Google et al. instead of
URLs anyway, but in the meantime a TLD 1 percent is going to get rich by
confusing and "protecting" the 99 percent. </div>
<div><br></div>
<div>here is my own written testimony for the Senate Commerce Committee hearing
last week:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">T</span><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'">hank
you,</span><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'"> </span><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'">Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member
Hutchinson, </span><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">esteemed
Senators, Committee staff and others, for your attention to this important
issue.<span> </span>As a private citizen with a variety of affiliations
but beholden to no single employer or institution, I am honored to be here
today.<span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">My name
is Esther Dyson. <span> </span>I was the founding chairman of ICANN's
board, from its inception in September 1998 until late in 2000. I continued as a
member of the ICANN At-Large Advisory Committee for a year or two after that,
and subsequently went on with the rest of my life.<span> </span>I am a
casual user of domain names; I have a couple registered that I don't use, and
then I have owned and used <a href="http://edventure.com/" target="_blank">edventure.com</a> since before my ICANN tenure.<span>
</span>As an investor, a board member of non-profit and for-profit companies and
as a user of the Internet, I do have a substantial interest in freedom of speech
and freedom to innovate.<span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Other
than that, I have no particular business interests in the domain name system,
and I paid my own way here today. <span> </span>Moreover, unlike most of
the public, I have the private resources, the time and the insider knowledge to
come here to give you what I hope you will find to be an informed and useful
perspective.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">I come
as a loving critic to improve ICANN, not to bury it. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Some
brief history<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">When I
joined the board of ICANN back in 1998, the majority of its members had almost
no experience with the Internet and attempted to serve the interests of a broad
public.<span> </span>At the time, our primary mission was to break
the monopoly of Network Solutions (which managed .com among other registries),
first by separating the functions of registry (which manages the list of names
in a particular top-level domain) and registrar (which resells second-level
domain names to the public). <span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">We
succeeded in that, and we also managed to launch a few new TLDs, including .biz,
.info, .museum and .coop. Of those, only .biz and .info have had much
success.<span> </span>Separately, a number of creative people – whose
initiative I sincerely applaud – made special-purpose TLDs out of country codes
(ccTLDs) such as .tv (Tuvalu), .md (Moldova), .ly (Libya) and most recently .co
(Colombia).<span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">At the
same time, it's fair to say that .com retained its first-mover advantage as by
far the leading TLD.<span> </span>Users instinctively type <a href="http://COMPANYNAME.com/" target="_blank">COMPANYNAME.com</a> into their
browsers.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">I myself
was a big fan of the concept of new TLDs. <span> </span>I believed that it
would broaden the market, encourage innovation (as with the repurposed ccTLDs I
mentioned above)...and besides, why should ICANN enforce artificial
scarcity?<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">But I
have since changed my mind.<span> </span>Now I would like to explain why,
and finally to suggest some paths forward.<span>
</span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Why I
changed my mind – Confusing to the public<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">After my
two-year term as chairman of ICANN expired in 2000, I joined the At-Large
Advisory Committee.<span> </span>Our mission was to make sure the voice of
the ultimate users – not just the sellers, resellers and buyers of domain names
– was heard.<span> </span>That turned out to be an almost impossible
task.<span> </span>Naturally enough, normal members of the public did not
have the time or interest (or funds) to involve themselves in ICANN's
business.<span> </span>Despite numerous attempts, we failed to atttract
more than a few thousand people at best to our various meetings, online
conversations, requests for comment and the like.<span> </span>Our online
message board was mostly painful to read.<span> </span>When I finally
resigned from the ALAC, I too found ICANN too removed from my daily interests to
pay much attention to its activities. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Why I
changed my mind – Lack of oversight<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Our
premise for new TLDs was that we would select registry managers who would add
value to their<span> </span>TLDs and monitor the behavior of their
registrars, who would in turn make sure that the registrants followed whatever
requirements the registries imposed.<span> </span>In fact, the business
overall has become one of sleazy marketing practices, front-running (where
registrars or related parties buy names for their own accounts, competing
unfairly with their customers) and a high proportion of spammy
domains.<span> </span>Unfortunately, the ease and lack of accountability
with which someone can buy a domain name has led to a profusion of spam,
phishing and other nefarious sites. <span> </span>There's no reason to
think the situation would be any better with the next set of new TLDs; there
would simply be more of them.<span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">And as
the case of .xxx shows, many of the second-level domain-name purchasers who do
have honest intentions will probably be more interested in defensive
registrations rather than adding value to the system.<span> </span>(One
such case is that of <a href="http://Meetup.com/" target="_blank">Meetup.com</a>,
out of whose office I work and on whose board I sit. </span><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'">Meetup has attempted to register
Meetup.xxx, but has been told the name has been reserved on the "premium queue"
to be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Even more perversely, Meetup
cannot even bid at auction for its own trademarked name unless it somehow
becomes registered as a member of the "adult community," which is at odds with
the very nature of its business and the very reason it sought to reserve the
name. Meetup's only remedy ultimately will be to file an expensive
and time-consuming trademark lawsuit.)</span><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Why I
changed my mind – Misallocation of resources<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Our
initial assumption was that new TLDs would be relatively cheap.<span>
</span>But ICANN's current plan envisions an expensive application process and
expensive registrations.<span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">The
amount of money likely to be spent on these new TLDs - both by new applicants
and registrants, and by incumbents protecting their names -
<span> </span>is huge, at a time when businesses and consumers are just
scraping by.<span> </span>I believe in innovation, but only if it adds
value. In this case, most of the new domains would simply add friction.
<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">As with
.xxx, where many of the registrants are actually companies who want to make sure
their name is <i>not </i>used in .xxx, I predict that many or most of the new
registrations will be defensive.<span> </span><a href="http://Marriott.com/" target="_blank">Marriott.com</a>, for example, works
fine; why do they need marriott.hotels except defensively?<span>
</span>(Or why do they need to own .marriott?) <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">The
rationale is that there's a shortage of domain names... but actually, there's a
shortage of space in people's heads.<span> </span>When you add, for
example, .hotel, you are not creating new space; you are carving up the «hotel»
space in people's heads into .com and .hotel.<span> </span>So was that <a href="http://Marriott.com/" target="_blank">Marriott.com</a> or
Marriott.hotel?<span> </span>or <a href="http://dyson.com/" target="_blank">dyson.com</a> or dyson.hotel? if I decide to rent out my
apartment.<span> </span>Consumers will inevitably be confused, and the
primary beneficiaries will be Google, trademark lawyers...and of course the
registries and registrars. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">In
short, it's as if you owned a field, and you paid a border guard.<span>
</span>Now the border guards want you to pay separately for each little chunk in
your field; it's still the same field, but now it's carved into ever-smaller
pieces. To use my own small field as an example, the field was originally called
<a href="http://edventure.com/" target="_blank">edventure.com</a>.<span>
</span>Now the new chunks could be labeled edventure.angel, edventure.blog,
edventure.nyc, edventure.post, edventure.fin .... and perhaps I'll also be
solicited to buy the TLD .edventure so that some educational or editorial group
won't get hold of it.<span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">In the
end, new domain names are somewhat like derivatives: They add complexity and
transactions and lots of rights and obligations without actually creating
anything of value.<span> </span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Context: Innovation can happen without new
TLDs<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">I have
heard from people who say that the new TLDs will lead to great
innovation.<span> </span>I once thought so too.<span> </span>I had
visions of .fin as high-value, highly secure TLD for regulated financial
services, for example. <span> </span>Right now, there are people who want
to launch .eco and .green as the foundation of a «green» marketing campaign that
would purportedly do untold good for the world at large.<span> </span>But
what's wrong with <a href="http://edventure.com/green?" target="_blank">edventure.com/green?</a> <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Meanwhile, there is innovation in namespaces, but it comes with overall
innovation.<span> </span>One of the best and simplest examples I can think
of is twitter, where I am @edyson or </span><span lang="RU"><a href="http://twitter.com/#!/edyson" target="_blank"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'">http://twitter.com/#!/edyson</span></a></span><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"> - a fine use of an
<i>existing</i> TLD. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Remedies ....<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Of
course, my task here does not end with complaining.<span> </span>What
should be done?<span> </span>First of all, it is not the role of Congress
to tell ICANN what to do. ICANN is accountable to the worldwide public, not to
the US Government (except through one limited contract).<span> </span>But
it <i>is</i> the role of Congress to shed light on issues of public interest,
and to suggest politely that ICANN follow through more fully on its acknowledged
obligation to solicit public feedback.<span> </span>As I discovered during
my time at ICANN, it's hard to get the public interested in these
matters.<span> </span>(In that respect too, domain names are like
derivatives.) <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">As I
mentioned, ICANN has indeed followed the process of soliciting public opinion,
but I do not believe they have obtained «informed consent,» in the sense that
people actually understand the issues.<span>
</span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Much
broader consultation with the public<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Therefore, although personally I would like to see ICANN simply abandon
this program, I have been told again and again that this is not «realistic.»
<span> </span>If that is indeed the case, <span> </span>I would
recommend that ICANN rapidly re-launch its consultation process with much
broader outreach.<span> </span>Perhaps these hearings and the subsequent
press coverage will help to inform the broader public and shade ICANN's approach
to new TLDs.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Much
stronger front-end protection<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">At the
same time, ICANN could offer much broader and easier protection (from
similar-sounding TLDs) to existing registrants, akin to what ICANN itself has
and what the Red Cross is asking for.<span> </span>Of course, this would
obviate much of the interest in the new domain names, but it is a proper
obligation for ICANN to undertake, in my opinion.<span>
</span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">Conclusion<u></u><u></u></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">The
current domain name system in some ways is an accident of history.<span>
</span>ICANN was created to regulate it, independently of any government and on
behalf of the Internet – and world - community as a whole.<span>
</span>Just as with fishing rights, communications spectra, taxi medallions and
other «commons,»<span> </span>there's a delicate balance between too
few and too many domain names, which this new initiative may well upset if it
goes forward without more serious study.<span> </span>As the old saying
goes:<span> </span>If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU">I would
welcome any questions. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Goudy Old Style'" lang="RU"><u></u><u></u></span> </p></div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>On Dec 12, 2011, at 9:46 AM, David Farber wrote:</div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br><br><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-rush/2011/12/09/gIQA5Ms9nO_story.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-rush/2011/12/09/gIQA5Ms9nO_story.html</a><br><br>ICANN
reports to no one — a decision made when the group was created during the
Clinton administration to protect Internet independence. The group has made
some adjustments in response to concerns, including creation of a trademark
clearinghouse and a “rapid response” process to allow legitimate rights
holders to quickly knock out imposters. Officials have said that some
nonprofits may be permitted to pay lower fees.<br><br>Although the plan has
been six years in the making, it is not ready for prime time. ICANN officials
acknowledge that they are still working out some details, including certain
protections for trademark holders. The Justice Department and other law
enforcement agencies have expressed concerns about enforcement.<br><br>ICANN
should not approve new names until enforcement and protection issues are
resolved. Even then, it should approve at most a few, to allow the marketplace
to absorb and weigh the changes. ICANN would be wise to move slowly; its
legitimacy and Internet efficacy are at
stake.<br><br>snip<br><br>-------------------------------------------<br>Archives:
<a href="https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now" target="_blank">https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now</a><br>RSS Feed:
<a href="https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/124966-899eea08" target="_blank">https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/124966-899eea08</a><br>Modify
Your Subscription: <a href="https://www.listbox.com/member/?&" target="_blank">https://www.listbox.com/member/?&</a><br>Unsubscribe Now: <a href="https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20111212094620:0B2BF592-24D0-11E1-A2D1-BF5D4049111E" target="_blank">https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20111212094620:0B2BF592-24D0-11E1-A2D1-BF5D4049111E</a><br>Powered
by Listbox: <a href="http://www.listbox.com/" target="_blank">http://www.listbox.com</a><br></div></blockquote></div><br>
<div>
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word"><span style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word">
<div>
<div>
<div>Esther Dyson</div>
<div><a href="mailto:edyson@edventure.com" target="_blank">edyson@edventure.com</a></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>c/o Meetup HQ</div>
<div>632 Broadway, 10th floor</div>
<div>New York, NY 10012</div>
<div>USA</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><a href="http://www.edventure.com/" target="_blank">www.edventure.com</a></div>
<div><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/edyson" target="_blank">www.flickr.com/photos/edyson</a></div>
<div>@edyson</div>
<div><br></div></div>Always make new
mistakes!</div><br></div></span><br></div><br><br></div><br></div></div></div><br>
<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 5px; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; WIDTH: auto; PADDING-RIGHT: 5px; CLEAR: both; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 5px" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<table style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td padding="4px"><font style="FONT-FAMILY: helvetica, sans-serif" color="#333333" size="1"><a style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #444444 1px solid; COLOR: #669933; TEXT-DECORATION: none" title="Go to archives for ip" href="https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now">Archives</a> <a style="COLOR: #669933; TEXT-DECORATION: none" title="RSS feed for ip" href="https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/125975-1ee5912c" border="0"><img border="0" src="https://www.listbox.com/images/feed-icon-10x10.jpg" nosend="1"></a> |
<a style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #444444 1px solid; COLOR: #669933; TEXT-DECORATION: none" title="" href="https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=125975&id_secret=125975-23791a65">Modify</a>
Your Subscription | <a style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #444444 1px solid; COLOR: #669933; TEXT-DECORATION: none" title="" href="https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=125975&id_secret=125975-8f271c78&post_id=20111212111948:1AB27A42-24DD-11E1-934C-DD02DAE3A5B2">Unsubscribe
Now</a> </font>
</td><td valign="top" align="right"><a style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none" href="http://www.listbox.com/"><img title="Powered by Listbox" border="0" src="https://www.listbox.com/images/listbox-logo-small.png" nosend="1"></a></td></tr></tbody></table></div>!DSPAM:2676,4ee62ab4217011843118341!
</div>
____________________________________________________________<br>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>To be removed from the list, visit:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br><br>For all other list information and functions, see:<br> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br><br></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>