ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[wg-review]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

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
to prove that we have nothing to hide.



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-----
From: FRupp@aol.com [mailto:FRupp@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 9:13 AM
To: wg-review@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [wg-review] Voters should indicate they voted!


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





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>