Jay and all,

  Thanks for the report Jay.  However the CLOSED meeting seemed, from these
comments you are making here to be pretty much worthless with respect
to any real resolution and unlikely to improve given the situation.

 It is odd to us anyway that the ORSC would participate in such a CLOSED
meeting given the public statements in the ORSC's opposition to such meetings.

  The same only workable resolution still stands out blairingly.  That being
that meetings regarding these issues must be held online in order to
be inclusive as possible and to keep things honest and open for all
"Intrested Parties", as stated in the White Paper, to participate.  In
addition it also should be obvious that no CONSENSUS can ever be
reached or accurately claimed unless there is an online voting mechnisim
to measure if that CONSENSUS exists.

Jay Fenello wrote:

Hello everyone,

While it's been a very long day, I did
want to file a quick report.  I'll post
more when I get a chance.

Today's closed meeting was relatively
un-eventful.  It started with the usual
intro's.  Then, four organizations that
had completed drafts (including ORSC)
presented their version of the DNSO
by-laws.

After words, a professional mediator used the
rest of the day exploring points of consensus,
and points of divergence.  This information
is supposed to be used somehow in tomorrow's
open meeting.

Unfortunately, for most of us who have
been involved in this debate for more than
six months, it was simply a rehash of the
same old issues.

For ORSC's part, we continued our calls
for openness in our presentation, in our
meeting comments, and in our private
comments.

So why a closed meeting?  I believe that
their goal was to limit attendance to a
manageable size, one that would work for
their mediator.

IMHO, even if you agree with that goal, the
process that they used was not appropriate.
FWIW, I said so, and they agreed without
explanation.

In closing, today's event didn't seem to
accomplish much.  Maybe tomorrow will be
better.  Stay tuned.

Respectfully,

Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.
404-943-0524  http://www.iperdome.com


Regards,
--
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
 

Reply via email to