TEST - IS THIS LIST S

[Jeff Binkley]

This seems to be the case for folks who disagree with you.  Unfortunate.

Jeff Binkley
ASA Network Computing



PF>*plonk*

PF>That was the sound of Dave McClure going into my kill filter file.

PF>- paul

PF>At 11:26 PM 2/17/97 -0500, Dave McClure wrote:

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

CMPQwk 1.42 9999