>> so tell me, vint. maybe i am bit slow here, but. as icann is a
>> shepherd of the public trust, other than personnel data, which are
>> obviously confidential, why is icann not fiscally and procedurally
>> transparent? why did there need to be any of this pool-pah in the
>> first place? was there a critical shortage of controversy?
> karl's initial request was for unlimited access (fine) AND
> ability to release without limit any material he saw fit. ICANN
> responded with a procedure to protect confidentiality. Karl never
> took advantage of that (others did) but instead sued. I would
> note that his position as to access/release changed, at least as
> I understand it, after the suit was filed.
these are details of yet another cat fight into which icann has
wandered in its ever-unsatisfied desire for pool-pah. i was trying
to look above that. what fiscal or procedural matters of icann
(other than personnel data, which are usually well-protected
anyway) preclude simple transparency? why don't you just simply
publish the stuff at a detailed level on the web [0]?
randy
---
[0] - e.g. afnog's financial *details*, not summary, down to the
dollar are on a public web site. e.g.
<http://www.nsrc.org/AFNOG-2000-Final.html>
<http://www.nsrc.org/AFNOG-2001-Final.html>
i don't think 2002 is finalized yert