test - is this list still alive?

[The Innkeeper]

Welp Paul,

I have been sitting here watching and learning....But I must observe that
your *plonk* of Dave is an example of the fact that there ARE educated
folks out there who also have their heads up their posteriors to the point
that they will not listen....

I must apologize for this comment to the list....And I also must state that
I speak for myself on this observation.....

One other observation I must question and address is the fact if Paul ALSO
speaks for Cisco???

- Steve -

----------
> *plonk*
> 
> That was the sound of Dave McClure going into my kill filter file.
> 
> - paul
> 
> At 11:26 PM 2/17/97 -0500, Dave McClure wrote:
> 
> >
> >On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, Larry Honig wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry, I know this is not ontopic, but I have heard *nothing* from
this
> >> list in 3 days (before that there were 50 msg/day). Is it over?
> >
> >The BoT people had a meeting a couple of weeks ago and made some changes
> >to the proposal which they presented at the NANOG meeting in San
Francisco
> >last week. 
> >[Dave McClure]  
> >Please note that this is no longer a **proposed Board of Trustees**, but
> that this self-elected group of hijackers is already at work trying to
> claim a monoploly on all North and South American IP addresses.  Who
> elected them?  Under whose authority?  And why is there only one persone
> even remotely associated with an actual ISP on this "Board of
Trudtees?????"
> >
> >At the NANOG meeting there were a few people who hadn't really heard
about
> >ARIN and we urged them to read through the website and the list archives
> >and then join the list if they still had concerns. I would expect we
will
> >be hearing from some of those folks this week if they still have
> >questions.
> >[Dave McClure]  
> >And be severely flamed if you happen to disapprove of this proposal. 
BTW,
> if you'd like some really serious reading on the subject, look at the way
> that APNIC and RIPE were formed.  They were formed as a **true**
> collaborative effort by the ISPs who had control of the IP addressing
> systems. . .with open election of their Boards, ISP control of the
system,
> and a real non-profit status.
> >
> >But my own personal gut-feel on the ARIN situation is that it's ready to
> >go if we can just nail down the stuff in the proposal that is still
> >written in conditional language.
> >
> >[Dave McClure]    
> >Hehehehe!  Like having real non-profit status, open elections of the
Board
> of Trustees, a proposed set of bylaws, a mission, or anything else that
> **real** non-profit organizations have.  How about a proposed budget, any
> input from the ISPs who will foot the bill for this, or the authority
under
> which these hijackers are operating????
> >
> >Michael, can you give a list, here in public, of the major ISPs who
> support this proposal?  I am very prepared to provide a list of the ISPs
> who do not. . .large, and small.
> >
> >The truth is that this is a poorly crafted, poorly defined organization
> whose only purpose seems to be to gain control of IP addresses in the
> Americas.  As for it being a non-profit, the IRS looks poorly upon
> organizations that charge for services but try to claim non-profit
status.
> Unlike APNIC or RIPE, ARIN has no collaborative or educational mission. 
It
> is a simple overcharge-for-registry scheme, if the proposal is to be
believed.
> >
> >If this were a real effort for collaboration, why not form them as APNIC
> and RIPE did?  Why have we not seen proposed bylaws that set forth how
the
> Board of Trustees will be elected, and how the organization will be
> responsible to the industry?  Why no open information about accounting,
or
> what their costs will be.  This organization will pull more than $3
million
> from the industry in its first year alone, but offers **NO** accounting
of
> how those funds will be used, why they are necessary, or what the
> accountability will be to the industry.
> >
> >The truth is, Michael, that the authors of this proposal have little
> interest in "nailing down the details," and have rigourously avoided any
> opportunity to do so.
> >
> >Don't believe it?  Here's a simple test, Micheal. . .get an answer to a
> simple question:  How many exectuives of Network Solutions, Inc., will
> become executives of ARIN, and how many NSI employees will be transferred
> to ARIN.  And post the results of your query here, in public.
> >
> >Pardon me if this seems insulting, but the last time we heard such a
> ringing indorsement of this proposal was by John Postel. . . who almost
> immediately and mysteriously was named as a new member of the ARIN Board
of
> Trustees. . .
> >
> >Michael, have you ever (and I will invoke the FTC truth in advertising
law
> here, since this is a public forum) discussed with anyone the possibility
> of you becoming either a member of the ARIN Board of Trustees or its
> appointed Advisory Council?
> >
> >Yes, or no? 
> >
> >  
> >David P. McClure
> >Association of Online Professionals
> >
> >