Re: [registrars] [Fwd: [Lextext] Bret Fausett has a new post on Internet Pro Radio | icann.Blog]
Seeing as how I was the only one that responded to Marcus, I can only assume that you are addressing me Tim. And I'm really not sure why all the fuss. I neither complained about the staff nor indicated that I had a problem with anyone's actions. I was merely responding to a question that Marcus asked me about a broken URL - and promptly issued a clarification to my earlier statement once Bret corrected my understanding.
Am I missing something? The multitude of responses on this subject this morning, after the fact, is completely puzzling.
-ross Tim Ruiz wrote:
The invitation was sent to the Registrars list as an invitation to Registrars. This is of course a public list and some may feel that it is then appropriate to attend these calls without announcing themselves, and to record them without informing the participants that they are being recorded. Some of you may not have a problem with that. I do. IMHO, *ALL* participants on these calls should be announced. And *ALL* pariticipants should be informed whether or not such call is going to be recorded, or otherwise become part of some public record. Brett was on both calls. I don't know about the second call, but he neither announced himself or informed anyone, including the ICANN staff, that the call was being recorded. To complain about ICANN conducting itself in a transparent manner on one hand, and then support the secret recording of conversations on the other seems a little disingenuous to me.Tim Ruiz VP, Domain Services The Go Daddy Group, Inc. Office: 319-294-3940 Fax: 480-247-4516 tim@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [registrars] [Fwd: [Lextext] Bret Fausett has a new post on Internet Pro Radio | icann.Blog] From: Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, October 30, 2005 10:13 am To: Marcus Faure <faure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx I understand that Bret has pulled one of the recordings because of legal concerns raised by a person or persons on the second call. Which is unfortunate - ICANN has a mandate to conduct itself in a transparent manner, my expectation has always been that these calls are a part of the public record. Marcus Faure wrote: > Hi, > > I only found a recording of the first session which I attended - could > someone send a link to the second sessions's mp3? > > Yours, > Marcus > > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Ross Rader wrote: > >> For those of you that chose not to participate in the official >> constituency briefing sessions scheduled by the ICANN Staff for >> yesterday, Bret Fausett has made MP3's of both calls available. >> >> http://blog.lextext.com/blog/_archives/2005/10/27/1327040.html >> >> Special thanks to Bret for the contribution. >> >> -ross >>>