The latest

In <33B14229.38FF at ix.netcom.com>,
Jeff Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>   Yes some of it is from Einar Stefferud, whos background is nearly
> exactly parallel to mine.  Hence for the sake of keystrokes i used some
> of his wording amd made edits that were not related to me or my
> background.  

Bullshit, pure and simple. I can show you exactly which parts you
changed. You deleted a few sentences, added a couple of words, and
changed it so it appeared to have tangential relevance to ARIN.

You're a thief. You stole the entirety of Einar's text, made a few
piddling changes to it, and passed it off as your own. You're no
different than a lazy college student stealing his older sibling's
term paper. I'd call what you did plagarism, but that usually
implies making discernable levels of change to the text while
stealing the research.

"Some of it" isn't from Einar Stefferud, it's *all* from Einar.
The proof is below for anyone who cares to read it. You didn't
mean to share his ideas, you meant to take credit for them.

Here's a unified diff. If anyone wants, I'll be glad to put up the
original articles from the mailing lists on my anonymous FTP
site, so you can verify this for yourself.

-- BEGIN DIFF --
--- EINAR	Wed Jun 25 18:21:22 1997
+++ WILLIAMS	Wed Jun 25 18:23:34 1997
@@ -5,12 +5,12 @@
 Let me try to quickly summarize a few things from my own observations
 and understandings from long experience.  I have been involved in the
 center of these developments since 1975, in one strategic role or
-another.  And, I was hanging around with people who were directly
-involved for many years before that (i.e., since 1962).
+another.  
 
-The ARPANET was not built to survive Nuclear Bombs, or equivalent.  It
-was simply built to interconnect ARPA Contractors for the purpose of
-sharing whatever resources could be shared by being Network Connected.
+ARPANET was simply built to interconnect ARPA Contractors for the purpose
+of sharing whatever resources could be shared by being Network Connected.
+Though I do realize this is not DIRECTLY related to this thread or
+the ARIN.  Let me be very clear on this point...
 
 Originally, the entire ARPANET was owned, lock, stock, and barrel, by
 ARPA, and anyone connecting to it or using a computer account on an
@@ -49,8 +49,7 @@
 required me to use the ARPANET in performance and administration of
 the contracts.
 
-So, I fear that Simon's basic premises (see below) are off the mark,
-and we all know that A False Premise can be used to Prove Anything.
+  HERE WE GET TO THE MEAT OF THE MATTER.
 
 Now, after TCP/IP was deployed by ARPA on the ARPANET, it became
 possible to create what became the Internet because it was no longer
@@ -86,7 +85,8 @@
 administration to hold almost total respect from the whole Internet
 community, and until the mid 1990's, no one thought much about whether
 the root should be administered by a czar, or whether it should be
-more open, or totally open, or whatever...
+more open, or totally open, or whatever...  This would also include
+the ARIN.
 
 In my view, the authority of IANA derived simply from the fact that
 IANA properly provided TLD ROOT server administration, to the
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@
 revenue.
 
 This brings us up to the present mess where suddenly it becomes clear
-that there is no clear line of authority for IANA or anyone else to
+that there is no clear line of authority for IANA, ARIN, or anyone else to
 Czar the DNS TLD ROOT, and we are in a big fight about whether there
 must or must not be a clear line of authority for deciding what names
 can be used in the DNS TLD ROOT.  
@@ -125,10 +125,11 @@
 wish they didn't.  I predict that in due course, we will all come to
 the same conclusion about the Internet and the great question of who
 should own the DNS TLD ROOT.  At least we are not actually killing
-anyone in this DNS war, yet, though we are assasinating characters all
-over the place, and regularly pitting old friends and colleagues
-against each other in vicious arguments where there appear to be no
-holds barred.  Many old relationships have been torn asunder.
+anyone in this DNS/IP address war, yet, though we are assasinating 
+characters all over the place, and regularly pitting old friends and 
+colleagues against each other in vicious arguments where there appear 
+to be no holds barred.  Some of my old relationships have been torn
+asunder.
 
 None the less, I predict that in the end we will discover that the DNS
 ROOT does not need a Czar to select TLD names for the DNS any more
@@ -157,7 +158,7 @@
 that BIND is delivered with defaults selected by Paul Vixie does not
 mean that Paul is the Czar, and his statements that he gets his
 instructions from IANA does not make IANA the Czar either.  The fact
-that lots of administrators accept Paul's defaults is the critical
+that lots of administrators defaults is the critical
 key, and when administrators stop accepting those defaults and
 choosing others, we will all see that the servers do not have the
 ability to control anything about what TLD names are "in the ROOT"
-- END DIFF --

-- 
handler at sub-rosa.com