RE: [wg-review] Names Council 3

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|>-----Original Message-----
|>From: On Behalf Of Eric Dierker
|>Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:38 AM
|>Subject: Re: [wg-review] Names Council 3
|>
Hi Eric

|>The trouble with this correct logic is that it is not 
|>bottom-up.  Unless only the masses do the screening then it 
|>is top-down. In the U.S. the press fulfills this process far 
|>more effectively even than the FBI.  It looks to me like the 
|>same is occurring here, albeit slowly.

The system at the moment is certainly not bottom up.  It is a full on top down system with some illusion and lip service to being bottom up with the Constituencies.  The controls in place however negate even those concessions.  The system needs to be opened up and participants empowered more.  Then I do believe we would see far more participation.

|>What I am seeing is that there is in place a poorly designed 
|>model but that is not the problem.  The problem is more a 
|>result of participation.

The model limits participation.  It is inherent in the structure.  I'm starting to believe that was the intention.  I can not see how the design was implemented without realising the implications involved.  It would appear to me, intentional.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

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