>> Can you please list in plain English, the good things(tm) which will be
>> the outcome of making correspondence on this listserv avail for public
>> reading.
>you just make the spot on the "they reed the mails and are not members of
>pab" but in a broather vuew the pablic trust in pab true the openes
>of pab is far more worth then "having critisizers out"
This "openness" you and others speak of will not get signatures on the MoU
It will show the world that at least one significant part of the gTLD-MoU
organisation is a sham, and therfore discredit the entire effort.
>for me its seems a little that it is a personal problem you have hier or
I am only addressing the issues as I see them Sasha. I have no personal
attachment to any outcomes here.
>in general-altough your "analysis" of situation around "poc control" etc
>was solid but you was the first one who was for broather participation of
>the pablic in the gtld process and pab and now when we start to make this
>real you are against it and like to establish a "information embargo"
>on public ??
I have never advocated an information embargo on public. Quite the
opposite.
Our listserv does not have information in it. Its questions, answers,
comments
from individuals. Very disjointed stuff.
Information the public could benefit from needs to be simple, clear, concise
and above all else consistent.
I dont see our listserver being that voice.
>when we say black you say white when we than say white you say no its
>black :-)
I think we have a different view of how to communicate ideas with the
outside
world thats all.
regards
Peter Mott
2Day Internet Limited.
http://www.2day.net.nz
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:18 PST