"Rick H. Wesson" writes:
> On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Peter Mott wrote:
> > Access to correspondence is in my view a priviledge of those who have
> > committed to working with each other to support the objectives they
> > have agreed to.
>
> What does the PAB have to hide, openness is by far better than closed
> door procedings. opening thigs up so that detractors can be herd is
> IMHO a good thing(tm)
I don't want to have an open discussion any more. We had umpteen
months of that on lists like "newdom" and it was almost nothing but
pointless flaming. At least people here agree on fundamental
principles and are committed to working together instead of being
disruptive.
The PAB is not closed, btw. Any organizations agreeing to work within
the framework can join. That is about as lax an entry requirement as I
can imagine, and the talk of making an even more lax one makes me
wonder "why?"
Anyway, as to the specific issue of making archives publicly readable,
I also have to question what the point is. I do not believe there is
any reasonable expectation of privacy in what is posted here, but on
the other hand I'm not sure what the purpose would really be. To
assure people we are boring?
Perry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:18 PST