[ga] Re: [council] TF Transfers

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

Madam Chair,

Let me state for the record that I, for one, will condemn this Task Force if
it proceeds without granting a single vote to the individual registrant
community, and I mean on each and every issue put before this Task Force in
line with other stakeholder groups that are deemed worthy of participation.
 
This argument is entirely of your own making. While you and Philip have both
been throwing your weight around for all the world to see on both the
Transfer TF and NC mailing lists, you have been actively discouraging any
means of open debate on what is generally regarded by the majority of those
involved as a hugely inconvenient but largely valid issue related to its
core task. 

Over the last week or so, I have provided a proper basis to the Names
Council that clearly establishes why a serious problem relating to
participation has arisen, a problem that undermines the very validity of the
results the TF can produce. The GA representative and myself are not now the
only ones to question the make-up of this Task Force and it is in *nobody's*
best interests to suggest trivial solutions such as one off teleconferences
involving a short list of registrants will solve the problem of *ongoing*
participation in deliberations and doing so only insults our intelligence.

My willingness to participate in the most helpful way possible has so far
been been met by firm resistance, including the removal of posting
privileges to the various lists in which these issues are being discussed.
You will not even grant me the common courtesy of a right to reply to the
various proposals, each of which has merits, neither the opportunity to
rebutt your own and Philip's judgemental remarks in any venue where other
stakeholders will likely hear my voice. This in itself constitutes denial of
the rights of this individual registrant to participate in the process. Am I
right? 

And now you have the audacity to cook up your own little scheme that denies
every single individual registrant that exists in the world any vote in the
process, and attempts to thrust this upon this group a pre-conceived
solution decided behind closed doors that does not involve them save for one
measly teleconference. Well, I'm sorry, but I will not reduce my
participation in this organization to the level of bartering with a barrow
boy in a flea market for rotten apples.

Your duty is to conduct yourself "on the record" with respect to all matters
pertaining to the "top job" in this Task Force and *if* you have received
various conflicting views that have caused you to arrive at a conclusion,
then I really must insist that you disclose these for the record, so that a
proper public record of procedures you undertake is created, one that can be
used to hold you and the results of this task Force accountable, including
in a court of law should matters progress that far.

I extend my sincere apologies to GA members for the extra burden this post
and any follow up posts may impose upon them, and beg their indulgence while
I am denied other means to deal with this issue in an open and transparent
manner in a more appropriate forum.


Regards,
Joanna


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html