Re: [wg-review] Voters should indicate they voted!
In a message dated 1/31/01 9:29:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, rmeyer@mhsc.com writes: Forrester, If you think about is, that argument is as ugly as it gets. Not sure what you mean here? It is the same argument that anti-privacy advocates use for their cause. Using that argument, unltimately, requires us all to walk around without clothes, just If you mean that as (having yourself exposed to e-mail).... couldn't that be (some e-mail address) @DNSO.org...? Only by desiring to/and participating (here)(or anywhere there is public scrutiny), does one put themselves in a position requiring being viewed as Open and Transparent (to be taken seriously as forthright and above reproach)... The privacy issue (in the context of this discussion) IMO is far less important than being viewed as truthful and open. Forrester Rupp frupp@aol.com -----Original Message----- I voted at Joops Poll and Sotiris's too... A question for all....why wouldn't anyone want their position or stand, to be noted for the record, and open to the public for comparison to public statements (you) made in support (or against) a policy or issue. If we are to be open and transparent I for one would welcome (COMPLETE OPENNESS) Voting records, contact info, Statements of Positions regarding ICANN and DNSO ...Actions/Motions and/or Policies being voted on... Seems to me, only those with a hidden agenda or are presenting a false represtentation of their views (then voting the other way) ....wouldn't want complete openness... JMO...AV (and view) Forrester Rupp frupp@aol.com |