Subject: Re: Correcting an incorrect assertion. Was: Re: delegation mechanism...

From: Einar Stefferud <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 20:10:19 -0700

Very Interesting Ari;-)...  See my comments below;-)...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
At 10:47 AM -0700 8/3/02, Ari Ollikainen wrote:
>>Hello Dave Crocker;-)...
>>
>>Again, your message describes precisely what you did to me 
>>personally over a several year period of stalking beginning with 
>>your work with IAHC and continuing into the establishment of ICANN. 
>>I finally choked it off by simply never responding directly to 
>>anything you say or do.  But, here I find that you are right on the 
>>money;-)...
>>
>>I had been seeking a properly correct description of what you were 
>>doing, and using my theory that one's enemy often attributes to 
>>you, what he is doing himself, I now have a perfect description of 
>>the tools and the technique of your trade.
>>
>>Dave - I cannot thank you enough for explaining how you do it all so well.
>>
>>I think I will print it up and frame it on my office wall.
>>
>>And now back into my mode of not responding directly;-)...\s
>>
>>Cheers;-)...\Stef
>>
>
>	That's interesting...when Dave described what he characterized
>	as Karl's method, I recognized it instantly as EXACTLY what
>	Dave did to me several times in the past 30 years!!
>
>	The last time he did that was at several of the BOFs Jack Drescher
>	and I tried to start up a "IP based Remote Conferencing working
>	group" sometime in 1992/1993. Dave's singleminded negativism about
>	the subject stymied our progress to the point that we gave up
>	the idea of a group which could spin off other working groups
>	devoted to specific parts of the problem...
>
>	I only emulate polite social conversation whenever put into
>	a position to have to exchange words with him. Otherwise I ignore
>	him and his mostly bombastic pronouncements.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I make no claims to being the sole beneficiary of Dave's lavish 
attention, but he certainly stalked  me constantly for several years, 
even after I stopped responding directly to his attacks.  I have it 
all recorded in some obscure archives.

At one point, we allowed him to participate in ORSC discussions, 
where we had set up some very reasonable rules for maintaining civil 
discourse, but Dave, in keeping with his methodology, used our rules 
against ourselves in the most cunning ways.

We finally had to throw him out.  One way to control his presence was 
to move our lists out of ICANN range, and work in ORSC territory. 
There are some real values to being out of reach from the ICANN 
roots;-)...  I see no rules or protocol problems that would prevent 
groups from setting up private roots for private communication 
purposes.  Well, there is one problem.  Every mail relay server needs 
to be able to resolve the domain name of the final destination, and 
recent spam defenses also require that the senders domain name also 
resolves from its choice of root service.

I expect that there are many people out there who have suffered as we 
have, but I see no reason to flush them out, now that we have Dave's 
own words to explain the whole situation.

Thanks again Dave;-)... This is even better than a forced apology...

My entire approach has been to sit quietly and wait for an 
overstepping of the boundaries, trusting that some day the situation 
would go beyond the tipping point.  Sure enough he did it, but it was 
a long wait.  BTW I did not even use any bait.

By the way, ICANN is on the same track, racing to the cliff trying to 
beat everyone else to go over first;-)...  My advice is to just 
Let'em Go!

Cheers...\\Stef

---

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Aug 2002 23:43:00 -0400

> all recorded in some obscure archives.

That's what we really need around here. More ad hominem attacks. Yes,
discussing only people's points is so old fashioned -- instead,
lets attack their persons.

Perry