Robert Guerra ha scritto:
I think that at-large should have been a. told that a report was going to be filed on its meeting(s), and b. knowing that - that it should have been given the opportunity to either submit its own statement or review the article before it was published.
Robert, I've seen that request made before, but only by bad politicians to journalists lacking professional integrity, or by dictators in non-democratic countries... A reporter such as Kieren is free to report whatever he deems fit, as long as he takes responsibility for that; if what he says is factually wrong, you can sue him for defamation or, more simply, ask for a rectification in the next issue of the newsletter. It would be a completely different matter if he was purposedly given false information, or if ICANN was paying him to discredit the ALAC, but is that the case?
Recalling the sunday meeting and the request to focus on the problem and recommend a two part motion to be adopted in one of the next meetings of the alac:
1. That for future meetings at-large and the ALAC be given the opportunity to comment and contribute to ICANN newsletter(s) related to the meeting.
Isn't it already like that?
2. Individual members of the alac who are interviewed on at-large and/ or alac matters send an advance notice to alac.
No Party member shall speak with the press unless the Party has given him/her instructions? I'm not saying you are against freedom of expression, I think you are just sincerely worried by the political consequences of a sentiment of dislike for the ALAC if it spread around the community, but please realize that, as I already said, the only course of action is to solve our internal problems, not to try to hide them. Ciao, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------