Rebuttal to Mr. Weisberg's insinuations Re: Important News from Don Telage about ARIN

[Gordon Cook]

I am not sure what Eric Weisberg thought he was accomplishing by this
post. I am sure that he did succeed in causing me to loose respect for his
modus operandi.

Cook:  But I complained that the by-laws were not yet on the web site. Why
not? Because they are still being revised. I replied that, in view of the
situation, if ARIN is to have a chance at being successful, it would sure
as heck help to get the current version up there with a statement that
there might be subsequent revisions.

Eric W:  For many readers, this statement probably confirms the allegation
that Telage, alone, is making the basic decisions 

Cook: your suggestion counsellor....not mine, and not what readers would
conclude if the read the WHOLE post with a mind set that has not found
telage, NSI, kim hubbard and ARIN guilty in advance

Eric W:  rather than seeking rough consensus on how
the Internet community should organize itself to distribute community
resources.

Cook: show me the statute that says telage is required to seek rough
consensus. This is *NOT* an IETF working group.

Eric W: You mention having suggested the need to report his decisions soon
after they are made and post them on the website.  

Cook: beware when lawyers shift from quotes to their own words. Danger
signal.... Their agenda at work - generally one of obfuscation!
The closest thing I can find in my text is "If Don Telage couldn't get the
word out himself, he needed to find some other way to do it. " I go on to
show how we arrived at the conclusion that Kim should be the one to get
the word out. 

But you don't seem to see it.  Let me draw you a bloody picture. ARIN is
not Telage's organization. His future is not tied up in it. Kim's future
*IS*. Now unfortunately because ARIN has just been born - is a wobbly calf
trying to stand on its own feet, while the coyotes circle smacking their
lips and smelling blood - there is a small problem for the calf. It needs
mother's milk (money) to nourish it and mothers hooves to kick any coyote
who tries to clamp down on the newborn's throat.

In other words ARIN needs members that will pay money before it can stand
on its own, and break the apron strings from the mother. This will happen
in 6 to 9 months. Meanwhile NSI, responding to the wishes of a number of
community workshops and fora has agreed to pay ARIN's bills during it's
start up. During the period while NSI has accepted financial
responsibility to pay ARIN's bills, they will be involved. No other
arrangement is fair or rational.

Eric W:  It may have been a mistake to report that Telage did not reply to
your suggestion.  

Cook: Where in the bloody hell do I "report that telage did not reply to
my suggestion!!?" I report no such thing and I resent your implying that I
did. He said that he did not have time to get out progress reports or
engage in these debates. To my suggestion that he give Kim Hubbard carte
blanche to get the word out, he agreed. I stated that extremely clearly!

Eric W: I am not sure why you related  this if he did not agree to do it.
                                       ^^^^                           ^^

Cook: Related **what**, counsellor? If he did not agree to do **what**,
mr. Weisberg?

Eric W:  This particular comment probably also left the recipients of your
rebuttal wondering "Did Gordon ask Telage to let the community discuss
the by-laws and the proposed revisions before they become final?  What did
Telage say about that?"

Cook: Here, counsellor, in my humble opinion you stoop to Jim Fleming
tactics of surmise and innuendo. You, in my opinion, take the same tack as
McClure does in his determination to destroy ARIN.

It seems to me sir that not having gotten what your client wants by way of
address assignments, you are now determined to use the public lists of the
internet to do whatever you can to undermine the credibility of those
involved with the IP allocation process. I have seen other folk advocate
the use of lawyers to whip the internet in shape. It has failed up to this
point and I think it will continue to fail. You appear to me to believe
differently. That is your prerogative.

Oh, let me answer your do-you-still-beat-your-wife insinuation Eric. I DID
NOT ask Telage to let the community discuss the by-laws and the proposed
revisions before they become final. I did not need to ask him this because
to the best of MY knowledge he has not been the major force in drafting
the by laws. The major force has been Kim and the proposed members of the
ARIN board. As soon as they become the legal members of the board it is my
belief that you will have PLENTY of feedback from them with regard to the
bylaws. From what *I* can see you won't give them a bloody chance.... For
here we are for the last lord knows how many days with either you or larry
vaden picking ARIN apart, at all hours of the day and night seven days a
week. There are a lot of businesses out there not too dissimilar to your
own whose future stability will depend on an ARIN that works. The proposed
members of the ARIN board *ARE* highly respected members of the Internet
community who have played a significant role in creating the global
enterprise on which you now seek to provide a service. If you rip them to
shreds before they can put anything in place you will be judged
accordingly.

I am finished with taking my time to reply to your unwarranted comments. I
wish no further communication. I hope this is clear. Mail from you is
hereby routed to dev/null.

=========
here is my relevant text - some of which eric chose to quote, some of
which he chose not to quote.

I pointed out that the ARIN board was getting nibbled to death on the net
and felt unable to defend itself until legally it was indeed the ARIN
Board. I mentioned that I had found out that article 8 of the By-laws said
that within one year of the date of the incorporation the board was
obligated to have procedures in place for the immediate election of the
advisory council members by the ARIN membership - thus letting the air out
of the argument that the ARIN board would be a self perpetuating monopoly.
But I complained that the by-laws were not yet on the web site. Why not?
Because they are still being revised. I replied that, in view of the
situation, if ARIN is to have a chance at being successful, it would sure
as heck help to get the current version up there with a statement that
there might be subsequent revisions.

But what is the urgency? We are doing the right thing, Don said. I
responded that such may be very true but that damned few people on the net
believed it and I emphasized that they were using NSI's apparent
unwillingness to supply information to destroy ARIN's credibility - that
NSI's "good intentions" would be meaningless in another month or two
because, if Kim and the ARIN Board could not be PROACTIVE, their
credibility would soon be gone. (I mentioned Farber's publication of
McClure's accusations as a case in point.)  If Don Telage couldn't get the
word out himself, he needed to find some other way to do it. 

For example letting Kim Hubbard, who would be leaving NSI employment and
becoming the ARIN president, KNOW that she had his full approval to make a
weekly progress report on the ARIN web page and naipr mail list as to what
had and had NOT been accomplished - during the week just finished - within
NSI and within ARIN. Well it might not have to be every week but could be
as often as she feels necessary, Don replied. Fine, I answered.
Absolutely. But let Kim understand that it is *her prerogative* what to
write and that it does not have to be cleared in advance within NSI before
she puts it out. Make a repeat of today's situation where I had to be
bugging Don about something that looked reasonable to him but that looked
like one helluva nasty problem to the outside world impossible. Impossible
because Kim would keep everyone adequately informed. OK sounds reasonable,
I can agree to that, said Don.

I went over my notes of the discussion with Don, asked if he agreed to
them and if I had his permission to go public with a write up this evening
on the net. He agreed. So here it is Don, and I thank you for taking the
time to hear my message.

************************************************************************
The COOK Report on Internet               For subsc. pricing & more than
431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA     ten megabytes of free material
(609) 882-2572 (phone & fax)              visit   http://cookreport.com/
Internet: cook at cookreport.com             On line speech of critics under
attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml
************************************************************************


On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Eric Weisberg wrote:

> Gordon,
> 
> Thanks for the very interesting report.  However, I fear it will have
> the opposite effect on your readers than you intended.  
> Let me highlight some examples:
> 
> Gordon Cook wrote:
> 
> > (1.) The three
> > CURRENT members of the ARIN board are himself, Kim Hubbard, and Phil
> > Sbarbaro, outside legal counsel to NSI. 
> 
> Unsophisticatd readers will conclude that Don Telage IS the ARIN board
> for now.  
> 
> > I had found out that article 8 of the By-laws said
> > that within one year of the date of the incorporation the board was
> > obligated to have procedures in place for the immediate election of the
> > advisory council members by the ARIN membership - thus letting the air
> out
> > of the argument that the ARIN board would be a self perpetuating
> monopoly.
> 
> This will just make people ask questions.  What did it say til now? 
> What objectionable features are being left in place?  Why don't the
> members elect the advisory council from the beginning?  Why not devise
> the new procedures in one, two or three months?  Why aren't the members
> electing the board?
> 
> > But I complained that the by-laws were not yet on the web site. Why not?
> > Because they are still being revised. I replied that, in view of the
> > situation, if ARIN is to have a chance at being successful, it would sure
> > as heck help to get the current version up there with a statement that
> > there might be subsequent revisions.
> 
> For many readers, this statement probably
> confirms the allegation that Telage, alone, is making the basic
> decisions rather than seeking rough concensuson on how
> the Internet community should organize itself to distribute community
> resources.
>   
> You mention having suggested the need to report his decisions soon after 
> they are made and post them on the website.  It may have been a mistake
> to 
> report that Telage did not reply to your suggestion.  I am not sure why
> you related  this if he did not agree to do it.  
> 
> This particular comment probably also left the recipients of your
> rebuttal wondering "Did Gordon ask Telage to let the community discuss
> the by-laws and the
> proposed revisions before they become final?  What did Telage say about
> that?"
> 
> Please continue to keep us informed of what you learn on all this. 
> 
> 
> Eric Weisberg, Gen. Counsel
> Internet Texoma, Inc.
> The ISP which DIDN'T
>