<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ga] Proposal: New Cross-constituency mailing list
- To: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [ga] Proposal: New Cross-constituency mailing list
- From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 15:10:24 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=6JpXtHoDt4WPceVeCxbJazdCODMl5nzyIZ1vmNfkMYDtRXiaMHKJRO1pNiClwCLVL6UiOFNEu0XPDAM1VfWWtVEBQRrkAStaIPSR8MsdJ2wza06aZGy8xBvz7Fo71DSt3KrYKdHCOBxBP+aQD4gtlra0q1sCtbI8YAtkBGbtISk=;
- In-reply-to: <510514.39868.qm@web52205.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
--- Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> George hails from the Business Constituency wherein:
>
> "The moderator is charged with providing a value-added
> service with an objective to make BC e-mail lists
> desirable to read by time-pressed business members by
> minimising the unnecessary and untidy correspondence
> characteristic of certain e-mail lists within the
> ICANN world."
>
> The BC has always excelled in exclusionary practices
> preferring closed constituency-based Task Forces that
> they could control over open-to-the-public Working
> Groups (that invariably produced results not to their
> liking).
>
> In spite of ICANN bylaws that require constituencies
> to "operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open
> and transparent manner", the BC refuses to maintain a
> publicly archived discussion list.
>
> Their regard for the unaffiliated (such as you) is as
> low as their regard for the ICANN bylaws. Don't let
> it bother you... it takes all kinds to make a world.
Low blow, Danny. I can only speak for my company, and not the entire
BC, but I've been in favour of public mailing lists from the beginning
(and unmoderated ones, too). I've not seen anything "top secret" that
couldn't be archived for all to see.
Currently, only the registrars, ISPs and non-commercial constituencies
have public mailing lists:
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ispcp/
http://listserv.syr.edu/archives/ncuc-discuss.html
The Business, gTLD Registries and IP constituencies have all gone for
non-public mailing lists, so the BC isn't alone.
Page 30 of the LSE report did at least rank the BC's website tops
amongst all constituencies:
http://www.icann.org/announcements/gnso-review-report-sep06.pdf
by quite a large margin, but I agree it could be made even better
through greater transparency.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|