[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [names] Breaking in to the discussion
At 10:56 AM 10/13/99 , Joe Sims wrote:
This illustrates my point. The Board
publishes minutes that detail every
decision made; it has not published transcripts that detail every
spoken. The notion that the absence of the latter in the presence
former describes a "secret" meeting is just plain
bizarre. It is not a
public meeting -- although the last one was and people complained
it was no doubt preceded by non-public discussions, pointing out
difficult it is for some to draw any line -- but it is certainly not
"secret" meeting. If you think that sunshine laws have
American democracy, you will not like this; if you think that all
laws do is make government even more inefficient than it normally is,
will not mind at all. But for the advocates of pure openness to
consistent, they should insist that all Congressional, executive branch
judicial meetings should be held in public auditoriums. No doubt
some who would take this position, but it does not attract much
Again, these are ridiculous claims.
Simply look at the ICANN board minutes:
Now compare them to the results of the
U.S. Government's public inquiries:
In the former, you have meeting minutes
of the form:
So and so brought up this issue, so
the board hereby RESOLVES . . .
In the latter, you have a detailed analysis
of the topic at hand, a description of the
major opinions expressed, and the position
supported by the U.S. Government and why.
So, while ICANN claims to be an open, bottom-up,
consensus driven organization, they never even
mention the minority opinions, nor why they have
decided to pursue the decisions that they make.
And as this list so aptly illustrates, when
people ask WHY?, we get silence and snide
Welcome to Global Internet Governance!
New Media Relations