Re: IANA: Why Trademarks? (was Re: Emergent Press Conference)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Kent and all,

Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Nov 09, 1997 at 04:29:16PM +0000, Jeff Williams wrote:
> > Kent and all,
> >
> > Kent Crispin wrote:
> [...]
> > > Nope.  Just relating a little history.  The confrontational character of
> > > the debate was established long before the IAHC was formed.  That's a
> > > simple fact.
> >
> >   Yes it is a simple fact that some confrontational characters did
> > participate in the debate befor the IAHC perposal was offered.  However,
> > the IAHC perposal only served to make the confrontation worse due to
> > its lack of openess, which was revieled by many early on. (See
> > IAHC-Discuss
> > Archivves).
> 
> I said "long before the IAHC was FORMED".  You would have to look at
> the various newdom list archives to get the true flavor.

  I have and am well awar to which discussions and partaining lists
you were refering.  I reviewed the Newdom list several times, first time
was long ago now.

>  There is a
> possibility that things would have gone smoother had the IAHC
> proceeded in a different manner; it is equally possible that the
> effort would have collapsed entirely.  I wish things had been more
> congenial, but there is simply no way to know, and it's a waste of
> time to worry about it.  Hindsight is wonderful.

  I couldn't agree more, Kent.
> 
> [...]
> >   Not entirely Kent, and you know it.  The antagonist remarks that Perry
> > and Dace Crocker made are a matter of IAHC-Discuss historic fact.  (See
> > Archives to refresh your selective memory).
> 
> And your point is? If you go back in those lists you will find
> arguments involving almost anyone you care to name.  I remember
> arguments back from long before you were ever on the scene -- I had
> arguments with Perry and Dave, too.  I had a lengthy, hot argument
> with Carl Opedahl, with whom I almost always usually agreed, about
> the 60 day waiting period.  The discussion was contentious, period.
> If you can't stand the heat etc etc.  The IAHC, remember, was in a
> position where they *had* to take the heat.

  I am not sure that I agree with you conclusion here.  The IAHC could
have
taken a more open and less pretentious approach from the very beginning
and
in several periods after the first draft was made public.  But that was
not done, even though many on the IAHC-discuss list (Myself included)
pleaded for them to do so.  I even called Dave Crocker on the Phone
once and was ruedly rebuffed after offering to act an an intermediary
between him the IAHC perposal and the RSC's parties involved.  He just
flately refused to even listen at all.  I still have a tape recording of
that conversation.  
> 
> > > > You claim to've won already. If so there's nothing
> > > > to lose, so why not just relax and admit it turned out to be a massive,
> > > > special-interest-driven con and/or power play, in effect if not intent?
> > >
> > > Why not?  Because it isn't true.
> >
> >   Well than whay not comply Kent?
> 
> It's not my habit to endorse falsehood.  I can understand why you
> might approach things differently, though.

  Is this a snide remark or what?  If so, it again strengthens my 
contention that willingness to seek compermise is not part of the 
IAHC/gTLD-MoU process.  If not, than I can only surmise that you
are just plain wrong.  I hope it is the latter.
> 
> > > > P.S.  -  Kent's mail server reliably bounces all my mail.  I've asked
> > > > why but he doesn't say.  I presume he won't see this or respond, and if
> > > > he does, it'll be to an edited version in someone else's response.
> > >
> > > Duane, if my mail server is bouncing your mail, then it is showing
> > > remarkable intelligence, and I am grateful.  But I haven't done
> > > anything to make it look for you.  Mostly I manually delete your
> > > messages unread.
> >
> >   ANd you have just for the record, confirmed the fact that the
> > IAHC supporters are by design not listening in an open approach,
> > by ignoring someone's comments that may not be supportive.
> 
> Jeff, I am an MOU supporter, not their PR man.  I don't speak for
> them; I don't work for them; I don't represent them; I don't owe them
> anything; I don't get any money from any of this.  I am expressing my
> opinion, not theirs.  I don't represent POC, PAB, or CORE -- if I did
> I would be more diplomatic.

  I realize this Kent.  And I also respect many of the ideas and things
that you have said regarding shared registry model, for instance.  I am
not either for or against the gTLD-MoU/IAHC either, I don't work for the
oppisition, as you seem to believe I do, I owe no one anything at all,
and I do get money for representing my company and our affiliates in
part for my participation in these discussions as a part of my duties
I am appointed to do.  I can't say I enjoy it much, nor is it worth
what small portion of my compensation that I recieve fo doing so.  But
I gave my word I would do it, and so I am.  
> 
> > > Let me explain: as in every arena, there are many opponents of the
> > > IAHC I respect and like -- people with some combination of
> > > intelligence, experience, wit, charm, scruples, integrity,
> > > self-awareness, or honesty that I value as a window into a different
> > > point of view.  I read these people's posts.
> >
> >   I read everyones posts.  So I suppose that makes you a bit too
> > closed minded for a truely open viewpoint.
> 
> You like potatoes.  That doesn't mean you need to eat shovels full of
> dirt.

  Got to take the good with the bad, Kent.  That is what seperates
professionals from amatures.
> 
> --
> Kent Crispin                            "No reason to get excited",
> kent@songbird.com                       the thief he kindly spoke...
> PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
> http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

Regards,
-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. (Soon to be INEG. INC) Stay tunned! 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com

Wisdom:   "One who knows others is wise,
           one who knows himself is enlightened."
           Lao Tzu