[governance] Fwd: [gnso-dow123] Note from Paul Twomey regarding WHOIS clause in the Affirmation of Responsibilities Re

[Veni Markovski]

At 06:01 AM 05.10.2006 '?.'  -0700, Danny Younger wrote:
>Veni,
>
>I hit the Reply All button when I responded to your
>email.  If you didn't want the conversation directed
>to NCUC-DISCUSS then you shouldn't have included their
>address.

Danny,
obviously you are writing quite quickly. I responded to the message 
from Milton; this address was there. And I got the error message, 
that I am not subscribed. You wrote me afterwards, and if you have 
received such a response, you wouldn't include the address in your 
current (second) response. The fact that you did (I just removed it 
from my CC field) shows that you are subscribed.

>... and thanks once again for dodging all the
>questions.  Your contribution to enhanced transparency
>is noted.
>
>"ICANN will innovate and aspire to be a leader in the
>area of transparency for organizations involved in
>private sector management." -- Affirmation of
>Responsibilities Point #2.

Danny, Danny... there's so much pain in the world. I believe you are 
mixing again ICANN with individuals. Or individuals with ICANN. In 
anycase, you are mixing people with institutions. Your questions were 
addressed to the wrong person, and I told you who you should address 
them to. However, instead of doing that, you prefer to go along the 
same old way of communicating. I am not a politician to "fight" for 
approval of my responses. If you have asked me a question, I would 
have responded. You asked ICANN a question, and there's no ground 
whatsoever for you to exepct a response from me.

I will write it slowly, so that you could read it. See comments below.

> > >My questions are as follows:
> > >
> > >1.  The public presentation of billing contact
> > >information is not a current requirement under the
> > >terms of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement and
> > as
> > >such does not constitute an element of existing
> > policy
> > >relating to WHOIS.  Why then is the Board
> > stipulating
> > >that unrestricted public access to billing contact
> > >information is an element of current WHOIS policy?

This is a question for the Board, not for me.

> > >
> > >2.  What constitutes "enforcement" of existing
> > policy
> > >relating to WHOIS?  Does this mean that the use of
> > >proxy services will be banned by ICANN?  Have
> > >Directors discussed this possibility?

Again a question about ICANN. As for the discussions you know that 
there will be minutes, and you will be able to find out what has been 
discussed there.

> > >
> > >3.  As there seem to be many issues associated with
> > >point 5, have Directors discussed the possibility

see above.

> > >
> > >4.  Why didn't ICANN act to

a question for ICANN, not for me.

That's why I didn't respond. And I will continue not to respond to 
questions, which are not addressed to me.

Hope that this makes it a little bit more clear for you?



Sincerely,
Veni Markovski
http://www.veni.com

check also my blog:
http://blog.veni.com


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance