[governance] today's Wash Post editorial

[David Conrad]

Parminder,

On Jan 27, 2013, at 2:24 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
...
> 2. They all (or, at least most of them) prefer a free float ICANN model whereby ICANN does not have to take anyone's permission to effect root changes.

Nope.

> ...
> 3. If US ever does any hanky panky business with the "authoritative" root zone, the non US gov owned root operators (10 of them) can be trusted simply not to follow suit. They were credited with such a keen global public interest minded-ness.

Nope.

> ...
> David who stone-walled any earlier discussion on this list

LOL. 

As numerous pointed have pointed out privately, it is obvious that continued attempts to explain things to you are beyond pointless. Apologies for being slow to realize this.

Since it seems there is more interest on this list in internal issues and position statements on subjects that I personally think are only superficially related to the Internet, I think it best I follow Mr. Curran and go into lurk mode (with junk filters for a few individuals so I avoid http://xkcd.com/386/ syndrome :)).

Regards,
-drc


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t