[ncdnhc-discuss] Re: NCDNHC - organizational conflict of interests. <...>

[t byfield]

roessler at does-not-exist.org (Wed 07/10/02 at 12:01 PM +0200):

> Is this the kind of objectivity the NCDNHC is also going to apply to 
> the bids?  Is this the kind of respect you have for .org  
> registrants?

i seem to recall, thomas, that after jamie love's re-bid initiative 
finally injected some life into the GA, you were quite sympathetic 
with if not the originator of numerous allegations -- maybe phrases 
like 'herd,' 'ballot-stuffing,' 'suicide,' and 'liar' will refresh 
your memory. i also seem to recall that you were VERY roundly crit-
icized for playing three-card monte with 'process' in order to kill,
then later obfuscate and dilute, the re-bid motion. (and what ever
happened with that motion in bucharest, o GA chair?)

and now, all of a sudden, you appear on the NCDNHC list suggesting 
that there are categorical COI issues and that this constituency's
input should be ruled out as such? and *then* you get snippy -- on
behalf of all .org registrants, no less! -- when milton points out
that you should bone up on some basic concepts before declaring what
this constituency can and can't deal with? give me a f---ing break. 

if indeed you care about the NCDNHC and COI issues, i'd be curious
to hear your views on blokzijl. if you don't have an views on that,
i don't believe you have any legitimate contributions on this sub-
ject in this constituency. you may have some *illegitimate* contri-
butions, but we have quite enough of that around here already, imo.

so: what do you think about blokzijl?

cheers,
t