Very well put. I have monitored this list from the beginning,
and while not being an active participant, have attempted to
keep up with the discussions. I do not believe that the past
couple days of posts have added to the overall goal of creating
a broadly accepted DNSO. You are most certainly not alone.
Antony Van Couvering wrote:
>
> Eberhard, Amadeu,
>
> Maybe it's not my place to say so, but I am distressed by the recent
> acrimony between the two of you, and I suspect I am not the only one.
> Perhaps you have received some private messages. Let me just give you some
> short thoughts.
I share these thoughts, and I hope that Antony's post will re-focus
the discussion on the task at hand.
In the future, I would personally like to see a more intelligent
approach at gathering opinions and attempting to forge consensus.
On-line registration forms, providing each interested participant
with a verifiable voting ID and password, and frequent on-line
quorums might be a good way to start. Transparency, however
certainly seems to be a base requirement.
Best Regards,
Richard
-- _/_/_/"The Total Internet Infrastructure Company"_/_/_/interQ Incorporated _/_/_/System Division _/_/_/Director and General Manager _/_/_/Richard A. S. Lindsay
_/_/_/Shibuya Infoss Tower 10F, _/_/_/20-1 Sakuragaoka-cho, Shibuya-ku Tokyo, (150-0031) Japan _/_/_/TELEPHONE: 81-3-5456-2687 _/_/_/FACSIMILE: 81-3-5456-2556 _/_/_/E-MAIL: richard@interq.ad.jp _/_/_/HOME PAGE: http://www.interq.ad.jp
*****"Internet for Everyone!"*****