> Welll....I don't think that *now* is the best moment for this move.
> Sacking people form he list, or opening "closed" lists would certainly
> raise the noise volume made by all our "friends".
(this mine replay is writen under the impresion of the intervuew with
mr.magaziner in network world fusion about the upcomming recomendation
of the USA government on the isue of dns and internet "governance"
by the way i dont see the "recomendations" of USG as binding us some
of us may think-after reading some of the reactions on pabs list)
in any case the goal is to MOVE FOREWARD
the question is not should we close or open the information
communication and cooperation process with the public but how we could
build up a WORKING infrastructure
the "voluntary" contributions by some members from "time to time"
is ok(speacking for pab-for those not on pab list pab discusses at the
moment if it should have a "closed" or "open" style of working what
means should pab only "represent" the interests of the signatoris of the
gtld-mou and have a closed discussion list and working process or should
it open their mail archive for reading also for the public and run a
complitely transparent way of working-no haiding on enything and trys to
represent the interest of the braod internet public in general) but
we need a more "structured and organized" way to "discuss and DO things"
so again if we start to see the "outside world" as "competitors" and start
to "hide" informations from them to gain some
"strategic and busines benefit" than we would becomme
"one group out of many"
if we see the "internet domain name policy and management system" as a
part of the "global internet policy and management" than is the POLITICAL
aspect of dns more importend than the BUSINES aspect what would meen
COOPERATION is more IMPORTEND than COMPETITION -in my point of vuew
so in this way i am for a OPEN and TRANSPARENT working process
even in the face of COMPETITION becouse some how there musst be
cooperation also between competitors
and if the isoc/iana/poc/pab/core dont SPEACKS for the entyer internet
-becouse it only speacks for "its members" than somebody else have to
come up and to speack for the ENTYER internet
as we know such organisation "dont exist" yet and i hope that isoc and
others are willing to build such level of cooperation so that isoc may be
the visioner and leader in such isues
and it would be not posible to keep governments out of the process of
global internet governance as they seams want to put them self - they
would never give up the right and chance to "govern" the internet
so the internet community hase to have visions of how to incoprorate the
governments in the internet government and become in this way be the
leading visionair and not let the government having more "advanced and
unifaying" vuews than "defractionist" vuew of some internet communitys
fighting each other-this is exactly what gives the government
"the right to lead the process of internet governance"
> Amadeu
thanks
sascha
ps.i wanted to cc this mail to the office of the vice president as a part
of my "transparent" way of working:-) -to share information is much
more powerful than "hide" information but becouse it is not a aproved
working strategie of the isoc/iana/poc/pab/core i have not done it yet
pps.i also apologize to mr.amadeu to use his mail as a oportunity to
express my vuews and requests for as open and allinclusive as posible
working process of the gtld-mou but i hope that the goal justifayes
the practice