Response to ICM's Memorandom
I have these responses to ICM's memorandum to you: Webmasters are preregistering their domain names at ICM to cover the possibility XXX will become a reality and not necessarily because they support XXX. The number of preregistrations at ICM is not an indicator of support for XXX. For the same reason any inquiries about XXX at ICM are also not an indicator. It is not likely the letters sent ICM in support of XXX is a proper random sampling of opinions of webmasters in the industry. It is highly likely a webmaster in support of XXX is more likely to send email to ICM than those who oppose it. This would mean the proportion of emails and letters sent to ICM in support of XXX is not representative of the industry. The number of empty chairs at the XBIZ Hollywood Conference is also not an indicator. There were many empty chairs at all the events there. The empty chairs reflect the size of the overall attendance of this conference verses the number of chairs in the seminar rooms and is not a sign of lack of opposition to XXX. The webmaster's who sent form letters from the referenced website are just as opposed to XXX as those who did not use the form to send their comments opposing XXX. That a webmaster used a form letter at a website does not delegitimize his opposition or overstate it. I would like to know how the poll was performed that ICM claimed in its application showed 20% opposition to XXX. An 80% support level is contrary to my own experience talking to people. XXX is opposed by the Free Speech Coalition, http://www.freespeechcoalition.com, which is representative of most of the industry. |