Re: [ga] Re: The battle over .xxx again...
Friday, March 26, 2004, 2:00:12 AM, Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
JW> Hugh/Eric, and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
JW> stakeholders/users,
JW> Hugh Dierker wrote:
>> A doctors standard of care has long been, that which a reasonable
>> practitioner would do in the same or similar situation. (used to be
>> locale, but telephones and internets and TV screwed that up)
JW> This may be why the increase in legal actions on mal practice has
JW> raised the
JW> cost if Medical Mal practice insurance so high that many doctors in the
JW> US are now doing without such coverage...
A popular and well publicized myth, but still just a myth.
Insurance companies are squeezing the medical profession from both
ends of the spectrum - rising insurance costs and reduced payments by
health ins providers.
Our Doc moved from PA to TX, because he could get 25-30% more for the
same procedure in this venue, but that advantage is rapidly eroding.
Ins Cos profit from investment income and underwriting. When
investment income is good, rates ease to generate more cash to invest
and with much less concern about underwriting. When the stock market
sucks, rates firm up, because underwriting becomes the primary means
of generating a profit.
The Malpractice claims and out of control lawsuit myths are a good
means to shift the attention, and the blame, elsewhere. Follow the
money to find the truth.
JW> Hopefully not before having sex in Vietnam I trust? >;) If not, your
JW> wife
JW> has my condolences to be sure...
Perhaps it may have been her preference :-)
>>
>>
>> Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Stephane and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
>> stakeholders/users,
>>
>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 09:12:22PM -0800,
>> > Jeff Williams wrote
>> > a message of 32 lines which said:
>> >
>> > > Seems to me in the .xxx specific case, depending on how it is
>> > > handled, it would be a good idea to have such a sTLD.
>> >
>> > Read RFC 3675 ".sex Considered Dangerous" first.
>>
>> ROFLMAO! Well .sex might be dangerous in Some
>> African countries, which may have been the IETF's motivation
>> for the RFC you reference. .XXX is a different matter, yet
>> perhaps such a "xTLD" has some merit "contracted" correctly.
>> However given ICANN's lack of reasonable legal expertise
>> I would advise strongly against taking any contractual determination
>> of such an "xTLD/ Adult TLD" without independent stakeholder/user
>> review, as it would almost certainly be a magnet for under age
>> stakeholders/users and thereby have it's own moral and cultural
>> implications on a global scale..
>>
>> As our friend and fellow stakeholder/user often told me,
>> "there is no sex/.sex in Vietnam"... >;)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> --
>> Jeffrey A. Williams
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
>>
JW> Regards,
JW> --
JW> Jeffrey A. Williams
JW> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
JW> "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
JW> Pierre Abelard
JW> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
JW> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
JW> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
JW> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
JW> ===============================================================
JW> Updated 1/26/04
JW> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
JW> IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
JW> E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
JW> Registered Email addr with the USPS
JW> Contact Number: 214-244-4827
----
Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.
donbrown_l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.inetconcepts.net
PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049
Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
----