Hi, I guess I disagree, I very much appreciate the ability to listen to the call, and am grateful it was posted. I think posting these calls is an important first step in achieving transparency of the process and I hope it is not stopped and that there are no repercussions towards anyone for having posted it. I have no problem with the staff doing information gathering, but I do believe that this has to be balanced. And while one meeting is not enough to know for sure, I believe the information that was relayed in that meeting might, through the use of one sided definitions, skew the studies. I think transparency has to be a universal principle at ICANN that we al strive for though we all may miss miss the mark at times. And while not everyone should be able to attend every meeting, everyone (and every constituency) should be able to know about meetings that are occurring and should have a way to make sure that the full spread of opinion and expertise is represented. this is especially the case in something as sensitive and culturally explosive as Whois. I believe expediency by the Staff is never a good reason for a lack of transparency. a. On 18 Aug 2009, at 14:15, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I am all for openness and transparency but we also have to be careful not to make our activities so cumbersome that we cannot get things done within a reasonable time frame.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:54 AM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Whois "misrepresentation study" meeting
Hi,
Yes, I am listening to it now. And it does appear to be an experts only by-invitation only meeting for the purpose you mention.
I wonder though, since the studies have grown beyond their original proposers, whether the range of voices at the meeting was adequate. I also wonder whether it is is appropriate for there to be meetings held with some participants in a council activity without others at least being informed and given a chance to request an invitation for their experts.
I am grateful that the mp3 was made available so at least thee is some transparency into the process.
a.
On 18 Aug 2009, at 11:45, Tim Ruiz wrote:
I believe this was the call with study proposers to give an overview of the RFP that would be used to do an analysis of the Subject study. So likely only relevant proposers were invited.
Tim
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] Whois "misrepresentation study" meeting From: Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> Date: Tue, August 18, 2009 9:54 am To: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org>
Hi,
Just found this in the calendar. Was this meeting announced? Did it have an agenda?
Was it an open meeting, as all GNSO meetings are unless specifically closed over personal privacy concerns, or was it by invitation only?
If I knew of this and it just did not register, I apologize, but I really do not know what it was about.
I will listen to the audio, but am looking for some context.
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-whois-20090810.mp3
thanks
a.