[ncdnhc-discuss] Board conflict of interest on .org

[t byfield]

apisan at servidor.unam.mx (Fri 05/17/02 at 12:43 AM -0500):

> in a case like the one at hand, what in your mind is the due process once
> Milton finds what he feels is a juicy piece of gossip? Can it be fair and
> can it be respectful of people as well as of rules?

alejandro, you've made it abundantly clear that you're very intent on:

     (a) using evaluative terms -- unimpeachable, contempt, gossip, 
         etc -- instead of actually attending to the substance (or
         lack thereof, as you insist) of the questions being posed;

and  (b) placing the burden not just of proof but also of method on
         those doing the questioning.

the problem is that your approach is contradictory: on the one hand,
you condemn those doing the questioning for asking questions, and on 
the other, you now insist that they should define the mechanisms by
which they should pursue those questions. needless to say, if they
do so, you'll condemn them with more of your -- time to get out your 
english dictionary -- 'bullshit.' it's time to make up your mind.

while i recognize that you, like many ICANN insiders, wear numerous
hats, you should really make clear which hat you're wearing. are you
speaking as a member of the NCDNHC or as a boardmember? the past few
years have made it abundantly clear that the interests of these two
entities often come into conflict; consequently, if you would func-
tion as a representative of both -- which i believe is possible, al-
though my own impression is that you have done a poor job of negoti-
ating that dilemma -- you need to be clear about what you're doing
at any given moment. so which are you doing now? 

please pardon me for being so blunt. it's very far from ideal, but 
ultimately ICANN isn't about whether you or i or anyone else likes
each other; rather, it's about the consequences of its activities.

i will also note that by failing to answer my question about whether
you were actually accusing milton of using allegations of a conflict
of interest on blokzijl's part as a red herring to divert attention 
to an NCDNHC COI, your your pious invocation of 'spanish' opinions 
of how criticism should be phrased lose what little weight they car-
ried. are you accusing him of this or not?

as much as i would like to, i can't make you go away by asking these
questions. but i can make it goddamned clear that if you fail to an-
sweer them, you're undermining not just your own case but, moreover,
the legitimacy of anything you have to say at all.

so: (1) which hat are you wearing when you speak on this subject--
that of an NCDNHC member or ICANN board member? and (2) will you ac-
tually come out and accuse milton of using allegations against blok-
zijl as a way to avoid an NCDNHC COI?

cheers,
t