RE: [council] GNSO Council meet and greet?

[Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think Bill gets it!

Nice work and thanks.

Adrian Kinderis



From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of William Drake
Sent: Friday, 18 September 2009 1:39 AM
To: Philip Sheppard
Cc: 'GNSO Council'
Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council meet and greet?

Hi Philip

On Sep 17, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Philip Sheppard wrote:


Council should bear in mind that there is sometimes an inherent conflict 
between transparency and freedom to dialogue.

For an individual, or small business there is likely to be no such conflict.
For an employee of a publicly quoted company or other organisation of 
reputation, there is a high likelihood of this conflict.

In some situations, not others.


Typically an employee of such a company in the knowledge their comments may be 
publically archived in oral or written form will be constrained in what they 
are able to say by internal guidelines or practise. These guidelines will 
typically be established to protect the corporation from legal suit, to protect 
reputation or to protect the share price.
Given the choice of continual checking with in-house legal counsel and silence, 
they may choose silence.

Legal suit?  Share prices?  What sort of complaint session do you have in mind 
here?  Adrian described it as people saying stuff like

On Sep 16, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
 I know the registrars for example would say that they are a little sick and 
tired of being pigeonholed simply because they have commercial interests. I'm 
sure other groups would have pet hates too.

Is this really the sort of topic that would be likely to give rise to legal 
action or affect your share price?

Remind me again how this exercise is going to promote group cohesion and 
effectiveness...?


If therefore Council has an ambition to have a frank exchange of views, 
separate from its central role of policy development, it should bear in mind 
the conflict that some Council members may be under through no fault of their 
own other than their choice of employer.

So expression of outrage and calls of "Vive la transparence" may make good 
rhetoric but will lead to poorer dialogue.

I'm fascinated that you consider transparency and accountability to be just 
disposable rhetoric.  And that you're so shy about expressing your feelings, 
who knew?

Cheers,

Bill