Dave and all, Speaking as and individual stakeholder, I believe that Dave comment here is correct and should be adhered to. The ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board works for us, collectively speaking (The Stakeholders), not the other way around as some of them seem to be of the opinion. They the ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board are there to SERVE, not to be served. They are there to SERVE us (The stakeholders/users), for our purposes not THEIR desires, wishes, or at THEIR convenience, but rather at OURS, collectively speaking, (The Stakeholders/users). Now speaking for a fairly large group of stakeholders. WE (INEGroup) collectively and nearly unanimously also believe and demand that the ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board, SERVE US and any and all other groups representing a group of stakeholders/users i.e. ORSC, BWG, ICC, ect. And that any and all meetings that the ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board conduct be they Executive or Board meetings be conducted in the open and open to the public with prior announcement with minuets taken and posted for further review in a reasonable amount of time. If they do not believe that they can achieve this than the NTIA should remove them post haste. Dave Farber wrote: > Just to be clear on what I meant by an OPEN PUBLIC BOARD MEETING. It does not mean >holding it in Rockefeller Center. There can be a limited but reasonable number of >seats for the public with usually a set-a-side for the press. The public is NOT >allowed to randomly comment and interact. They are given a period during the meeting >when they can request 3 to 5 minutes of time to observe, comment etc. One per >customer. They have the RIGHT however to hear all that is going on. > > Basically the US Sunshine laws say the publics business should be conducted in >public. Yes some will still use smoke filled rooms but that will, if fact, show >itself in the way the formal voting and discussion takes place in the public meetings. > > I believe that the ICANN Board will never gain the trust of the community unless it >opens up its process in a rational way. Here, in the US, many of us find what I have >proposed reasonable and liveable for all parties. > > Dave > > PS in our legal system, to the best of my knowledge, court proceedings are also open >to the public (in the USG vs MS they were usually packed). We sue when trials are >closed. > > __________________________________________________ > To receive the digest version instead, send a > blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___END____________________________________________ -- Jeffrey A. Williams CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Number: 972-447-1894 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208 __________________________________________________ To receive the digest version instead, send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___END____________________________________________
