RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List

["William X. Walsh" <william@tjns.tj>]

This would not be sufficient to stifle the criticisms of the lack of openness
in this process.  All this does is let us see what is decided by those on the
internal list, and not have any significant impact as to the content itself.

This is not acceptable.

There is only one acceptable solution, as I have posted previously.

Open ALL closed lists.  Divulge all list addresses being used for these private
internal discussions.  Welcome ALL who would be consider potential members of
the DNSO to join these lists and have some input as to the structure that is
being built to represent their needs.

Begin making substantive and real efforts to include ALL stakeholders in the
process and to add them into the leadership of this organization.  We are
talking about organizations such as Image Online Design, who to my knowledge as
not received a single invitation to be a welcome participant on this (Chris
please correct me if I am wrong).

Adopt changes in the current DNSO leadership structure and process that
unfarily advantage the CORE/PAB structure over those of other interests.  These
interests much be represented equally in the leadership as well as the
membership of this organization, and must be able to have substantive ability
to affect the final organizational structure and policies that are being
developed.

In absence of this, I assure you, there will be a second DNSO formed quickly
and that will embrace all stakeholders, and build a structure and and
membership to counter this DNSO and its behind closed door structure.

The ICANN had the support of the USG from the beginning, the DNSO does not
enjoy that support, and cannot try and use the same methods ICANN did to get
accepted despite substantial objection.  

And if anyone thinks that is not what is being attemped to have happen, they
are fooling themselves.


On 18-Dec-98 Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> IMHO the solution is to allow "discuss" subscribers to read "participants"
> posting, but not to write on it.
> This guarantees openness, and that decisions are not taken behind closed
> doors (besides that a quick check on the history of the lists can show that
> the only item of any relevance discussed on participants has been the
> preparation of the draft report - and this is perfectly reasonable, because
> I cannot understand how those who didn't participate in a meeting could help
> in drafting the minutes).
> 
> In fact, all the relevant discussion has been done so far in the discuss
> list.
> 
> What I confess being unable to judge is the technical complexity of putting
> this in place, but I would be very surprised to learn that this can be more
> of a few minutes work.
> 
> Roberto


-----------------------------------------------------------------
William X. Walsh (WXW7/WW1506)| TJ Network Services - The .TJ NIC
Network Operations            | http://tjns.tj / http://nic.tj
william@tjns.tj/william@nic.tj| Domain Names, DNS, Email,
+1-(209)-493-6144             | DynamicDNS & Web Hosting Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17-Dec-98 / Time: 18:14:08