<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [registrars] [Fwd: [Lextext] Bret Fausett has a new post on Internet Pro Radio | icann.Blog]
- To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [registrars] [Fwd: [Lextext] Bret Fausett has a new post on Internet Pro Radio | icann.Blog]
- From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 07:49:18 -0700
- Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Marcus Faure <faure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ross, I resonded before seeing the whole thread that included your
clarification. If I had seen it first, I still would have
replied with pretty much the same points. I don't mean to attack
anyone, I have a lot of respect for what you and what Brett do and
accomplish within the community. But that doesn't change my opinion
about disclosure of all participants on a call, and
whether or not it is being recorded.<BR><BR>Tim Ruiz<BR>VP, Domain
Services<BR>The Go Daddy Group, Inc.<BR>Office: 319-294-3940<BR>Fax:
480-247-4516<BR><A
href="mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx";>tim@xxxxxxxxxxx</A><BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid"><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: Re:
[registrars] [Fwd: [Lextext] Bret Fausett has a new post<BR>on Internet
Pro Radio | icann.Blog]<BR>From: Ross Rader
<ross@xxxxxxxxxx><BR>Date: Mon, October 31, 2005 8:30 am<BR>To:
Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Marcus
Faure<BR><faure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR><BR>Seeing as how I
was the only one that responded to Marcus, I can only <BR>assume that
you are addressing me Tim. And I'm really not sure why all <BR>the
fuss. I neither complained about the staff nor indicated that I had
<BR>a problem with anyone's actions. I was merely responding to a
question <BR>that Marcus asked me about a broken URL - and promptly
issued a <BR>clarification to my earlier statement once Bret corrected
my understanding.<BR><BR>Am I missing something? The multitude of
responses on this subject this <BR>morning, after the fact, is
completely puzzling.<BR><BR>-ross<BR><BR>Tim Ruiz wrote:<BR>> The
invitation was sent to the Registrars list as an invitation to <BR>>
Registrars. This is of course a public list and some may feel that it is
then <BR>> appropriate to attend these calls without announcing
themselves, and to record <BR>> them without informing the
participants that they are being recorded.<BR>> <BR>> Some
of you may not have a problem with that. I do. IMHO, *ALL* participants
on <BR>> these calls should be announced. And *ALL* pariticipants
should be <BR>> informed whether or not such call is going to be
recorded, or otherwise become <BR>> part of some public record.
Brett was on both calls. I don't know about the <BR>> second call,
but he neither announced himself or informed anyone, including the
<BR>> ICANN staff, that the call was being recorded.<BR>>
<BR>> To complain about ICANN conducting itself in a
transparent manner on one hand, <BR>> and then support the secret
recording of conversations on the other seems a <BR>> little
disingenuous to me.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Tim Ruiz<BR>> VP,
Domain Services<BR>> The Go Daddy Group, Inc.<BR>> Office:
319-294-3940<BR>> Fax: 480-247-4516<BR>> tim@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx><BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
-------- Original Message --------<BR>>
Subject: Re: [registrars] [Fwd: [Lextext] Bret Fausett has a new
post<BR>> on Internet Pro Radio | icann.Blog]<BR>>
From: Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx><BR>>
Date: Sun, October 30, 2005 10:13 am<BR>> To:
Marcus Faure <faure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>>
Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR>> <BR>> I
understand that Bret has pulled one of the recordings because of
legal<BR>> concerns raised by a person or persons on
the second call.<BR>> <BR>> Which is unfortunate -
ICANN has a mandate to conduct itself in a<BR>>
transparent manner, my expectation has always been that these calls
are<BR>> a part of the public record.<BR>> <BR>>
Marcus Faure wrote:<BR>> >
Hi,<BR>> ><BR>> > I
only found a recording of the first session which I attended -
could<BR>> > someone send a link to the
second sessions's mp3?<BR>> ><BR>>
> Yours,<BR>> >
Marcus<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> > On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Ross
Rader wrote:<BR>> ><BR>>
>> For those of you that chose not to participate in the
official<BR>> >> constituency briefing
sessions scheduled by the ICANN Staff for<BR>>
>> yesterday, Bret Fausett has made MP3's of both calls
available.<BR>> >><BR>>
>>
http://blog.lextext.com/blog/_archives/2005/10/27/1327040.html<BR>>
>><BR>> >>
Special thanks to Bret for the contribution.<BR>>
>><BR>> >> -ross<BR>>
>><BR>> > <BR>>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|