Kent Crispin wrote:
>I thought the pattern was rather striking in the context of a message
>titled "spin doctoring", and that pattern would make me feel
>uncomfortable displaying a grey ribbon even if I was otherwise
>inclined to do so.
The subject header is the title of an article published by Wired
<http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17742.html>. A reporter,
who presumably is not involved with this debate, chose that moniker.
>So, all these things considered, I think the "grey ribbon" campaign
>is counterproductive and divisive.
Au contraire, IMHO. The grey ribon campaign provides an opportunity for
individuals and organizations who may have different ideas about how to
implement SO bylaws but come together on the one issue that should be a
given: board deliberations will be open to the public. Kent, it's a pity
that you would not add your name to the list for misplaced fear of
something akin to guilt by association.
I'd like to address the interesting points you make among your reasons for
not supporting the grey ribbon campaign.
First, it is clear that ICANN is off to a rocky start and that it needs to
build trust among the individuals and organizations who have been involved
with these issues YEARS before the ICANN board members signed on. The
simplest and most effective way to do this is to hold open board meetings.
I am not so naive enough to believe that these geographically separated
board members don't communicate amongst themselves by e-mail. They surely
don't show up at board meetings without having already begun discussions on
the issues before them. Thus, I discount your comment #1 that, "Their
only realistic opportunity for such contact is through structured meetings
or telecons, and therefore there must be private meetings."
As regards comment #2, their "insignificant budget" has no place in this
discussion. Indeed, if they aren't fully staffed, a gallery of witnesses
at the board meeting will assure that no misinterpretations of the
deliberations or the votes are made.
KC: #3 "ICANN lives in a press fishbowl."
ER: ICANN has administrative responsibility over resources that affect more
than 100 million individuals. These board members knew that fact going in.
They should have both courage and the integrity of their convictions to
place their decisions out in the open. A world on the cusp of the new
millennium has no room for policies administered from on high without
giving those affected by them a glimpse at the deliberative process. Think
of all the ex post facto email explanations that won't be necessary.
#4 Yes, I am certain there are some board discussions that should remain
private. Instead of giving ICANN an all-inclusive right to withhold
information, I'd like to see bylaws which outline what types of decisions
(e.g., employment negotiation details, security issues) appropriately must
remain confidential.
KC: #5. "ICANN is just in its initialization phase."
ER: Certainly true, and that means there may be more frequent "course
correction" in this phase. Given that, wouldn't you prefer to know the
reasons behind decisions as they occur rather than have to react to them
three weeks later? Open board meetings may help forestall a firestorm of
belated criticism if poor judgment calls are made.
KC: #6 "Under these rather difficult circumstances ICANN is actually
doing a pretty decent job of getting out information. There are
minutes to meetings, there are public announcements, . . "
ER: All the board members need to be involved in these discussions, not
just Esther and one or two others. Further, since this IFWP list seems to
be the defacto list for those interested in ICANN issues, is it appropriate
for us to learn about major decisions and activities through the online
press instead of through a message posted here? Remember, too, that ICANN
has up to 21 days to post its meeting minutes. Three weeks of Internet
time is about the same as four months of real time.
KC: #7. "Finally, I would rather work with ICANN than against them."
ER: Criticism of its closed board meeting policy is NOT the same as being
against ICANN. I think we all share a desire to have a representative and
fair form of administration. That doesn't mean we have to lay down and
play dead for this to occur. We should continue to have a voice in the
development of this new structure. My voice has taken the form of a
symbol--the grey ribbon. If I felt ICANN was hopelessly flawed and
unworkable, the message delivered here would be quite different than this
grey ribbon campaign.
Ellen Rony Co-author
The Domain Name Handbook http://www.domainhandbook.com
================================ // ===================================
ISBN 0879305150 *=" ____ / +1 (415) 435-5010
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ ) Tiburon, CA
// \\ "Carpe canine"
Join the GREY RIBBON CAMPAIGN to bring ICANN out of the shadows.
See http://www.domainhandbook.com/icannt.html
