Jeff,
I suppose in this charged environment it's easy to find anything
disingenuous, but I'd hate to be restricted to an open mailing list as the
sole means of gathering input electronically.
The idea is to ping our volunteers with questions on a regular basis, post
the complete ongoing results on our web site, and send a digested version
of the answers, along with the original questions, to an existing public
list. That avoids creating yet another list--to which some will simply cc
along with all the others; your original message is a good example of
that--and uses the existing ones to get more input with a chance to answer
the questions with some insights already in place.
Anyway, I'll remove you from our list of volunteers if you're no longer
interested. ...JZ
At 07:12 PM 12/30/98 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>John and all,
>
>john wilbanks wrote:
>
>> Greetings and thank you for expressing interest in the Berkman
>Center's
>> study of possible membership structures for ICANN.
>>
>> Over the coming weeks, you should expect to receive questions from the
>> Berkman Center on a regular basis. The questions will reflect issues
>and
>> themes for the study, and we welcome your input on each question. An
>> edited digest of the answers from the group of volunteers will be
>posted to
>> the at-large ICANN list on membership as "seeds" of discussion on a
>regular
>> basis.
>>
>> This is not a mailing list. Rather, you are part of a group of
>interested
>> individuals whom the Berkman Center plans to ask for input into the
>study
>> on an individual basis. Please do not send regular email to the
>Center on
>> this topic unless it is in response to a Center request for
>information or
>> a response to a posted question -- at least one forum for public
>discussion
>> of the membership issue will be the at-large ICANN membership mailing
>list,
>> which Berkman staff will monitor for input (along with the IFWP, ORSC,
>and
>> other related lists).
>
> This request, John seems a bit contrived and in to a great degree in
>violation to the white paper, as it does not provide for either a
>compleatly
>transparent or open process. It is easy to understand why the Berkman
>center along with the ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board would wish or
>choose
>to use such a contrived and controlled process. That being that is does
>not provide for two way input form "Interested Parties" in a straight
>forward and honest manner. Please take note that we ( INEGroup )
>find this approach or method disingenuous and inapropriate and wish to
>go on record in expressing this.
>
>>
>>
>> Watch your inbox over the next few days for the first set of
>informational
>> requests and announcements, and thanks again for your interest in this
>> study.
__________________________________________________
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____________________________________________
