Sorry if no one on the PAB list agrees with my use of the word "compelling"
in the proposed letter from PAB to Secretary Daley.
I used it because it is a direct quote from Ira Magaziner (see below) in
reference to *my* comments about draft bylaws version 5 for ICANN, which
are posted as the Oct. 2 comments at the NTIA site.
Magaziner followed up with another note asking me to post at the NTIA site
both these comments and a draft of fiscal accountability language to be
added to the ICANN bylaws, which are there in the Oct. 3 comments.
Sure maybe he was just trying to be polite...
But the point I'm actually trying to make is, I believe it is inappropriate
for PAB to describe all us who have made any constructive comments about
ICANN as having posting mere "complaints" and somehow being deficient or
lacking in a cooperative attitude. Comments can be constructive as well,
even if they are not in total support.
We are all trying to get to the same place, and everyone's contribution is
valuable, correct? <smile>.
So thank you, Kent, for working in some positive language viz. the PAB
comments to NTIA....
Bill Semich
bsemich@users.org
.NU Domain
-----Original Message-----
From: Ira_C._Magaziner@opd.eop.gov [SMTP:Ira_C._Magaziner@opd.eop.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 1998 10:22 AM
To: bsemich@mail.nu
Subject: Re: The New IANA Needs Fiscal Controls
Thanks for your submission. I found your analysis to be important and
compelling. How would you change the draft in order to address the concerns
you raise.
Ira
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:36 PST