Patrick,
You wrote:
.... The only persons I have
> heard defending this position has been the ICANN board itself, IBM(in
> Boston), and perhaps some of the other "unamed third parties" that the
> ICANN board has been meeting with who will not self identify.
>
Without being one of the "unnamed third parties", at a certain point in time
I posted on this list a comment, stating that I found reasonable ICANN's
position that the Board meetings should not be held in public, but that all
the results and decisions should be made public, together with the
statements of the rationale for the decisions and the voting records (if
vote occurred).
The reason comes from observing that business companies and governments do
the same.
I agree with Hans (calling him by first name does not denote familiarity,
but ignorance of the correct spelling of his last name) when he said in
Boston that if the Board meeting will take place in the open, the
"negotiations" will take place beforehand.
I am still convinced of the last sentence (and, BTW, the examples that I got
back in aswer to my posting at that time still do not convince me that USG
decisions are taken in public debates) but I understand that open Board
meetings (preceded by unavoidable closed discussions) can be perceived to be
the lesser evil (or whatever you say in English).
I still maintain that this way of conducting business is less effective, but
I agree that will build trust. If the latter is the problem, we could
sacrifice some performance to the transparency.
Regards
Roberto
__________________________________________________
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____________________________________________
