Re: PAB Consensus Call: Email archives

Sascha Ignjatovic (sascha@isoc.vienna.org)
Tue, 13 Jan 1998 02:29:54 +0100 (MET)


On Mon, 12 Jan 1998, Dave Crocker wrote:

> At 10:57 AM 1/12/98 -0500, Bob Helfant wrote:
> >We have taken our lead from the IAHC and POC and kept the correspondance
> >secret. The same is true for CORE and CORE Excom. We may benefit if all
> >parts of the gTLD movement made their discussions public, but to just do it
> >for PAB is inconsistant.
>
> Not really.
>
> The PAB is a broad-based group discussing general issues. The POC is a
> small group, discussing specific issues and responsible for
> decision-making. The same for CORE.
>
> d/
> --------------------

i am with you mr.crocker

and i dont see what IS OR SHOULD BE SO SECRET wich makes the poc MUST
discuss this in closed fora ?

what is so secret on internet domain name system wich hase to be hidden
from public ?

now we use this arguments by mr.helfant-or just "search" for other
arguments "why we should not open up the process" and using all the time
on discussing again and again the same matter

some of us have offered arguments why the list and the pab work should not
be open and where "against" and some of us have offered arguments why a
benefit for opening the process and the list may ocure

as i notice the "majority" was in favour of opening the list and with this
the pab working process to the public

is the anyway to reach a "rough consensus" on this matter and proceed with
further work

mr.chairman would you pelase be so kind to offer some structured
forthcomming in this matter as you have officialy made this reqeust to
pab

thank you very much

sascha
ps.we can discuss this isue further but i see there is also some other
work wich waits for pab see the

-"reorganisation" of pab to "meet the needs" of poc and internet
community and in this way-i see the "openes" of pab work a part of it
-pab charter
-the future gtld developments recomendations and visions

etc

lot of serious and dificult work