I cannot help but observe: A simple rule of thumb with which to read the enclosed message is; If you want top know what your opponent is doing, listen carefully to what he says (in public) about what you are doing;-)... The enclosed message tells us very clearly what ICANN is actually doing. Enjoy the translation;-)...\Stef PS: Yes, spinning the truth into falsity is a fascinating game...\S At 7:38 PM -0700 8/1/02, Dave Crocker wrote: >At 06:46 PM 8/1/2002 -0700, Randy Bush wrote: >>these are details of yet another cat fight into which icann has >>wandered in its ever-unsatisfied desire for pool-pah. > >Randy, are any of the other players in this bit of opera ever >responsible for creating the problems? Does it matter that such >folk have no interest in serious discussion and compromise? > >Does it matter that we get assertions of fact that are proved wrong, >are then re-asserted and again proven to be wrong, only to THEN have >someone switch the topic and start blaming ICANN for pool-pah, >whatever the heck it is? > >In other words, does it matter that the only real public activity >that folks participate in with ICANN is to attack it. Sort of like >you seem inclined to do this week. > >Do personnel matters matter? Should ICANN worry about protecting >them? (And, no, your glib reference to the them is not enough, >Randy. ICANN is faced with a Board member who is consistently and >wholly rogue. That creates a rather significant challenge, unless >ICANN chooses to act only after Karl causes whatever damage he can.) > >Do contractual matters matter? Will living in a pure fishbowl >affect contracts? (Hint: The answer is yes.) > >Given that nearly all the folks dealing with ICANN seem inclined >either towards hyper-politics or hyper-criticism, what are the >chances that 100% transparency will cripple what little is left of >ICANN's ability to get any work done at all. (Hint: The answer is >100%) > >Or, perhaps, we all ought to remember that ICANN is supposed to pay >some attention to an activity of critical infrastructure and ought >to be allowed an occasional ability to focus on such matters. > >And since you seem to be fond of citing Jon's method of managing >that infrastructure, perhaps you will take note that he balanced >community discussion with private discussion. He did not conduct >all of that oversight in a fishbowl. > >d/ > >---------- >Dave Crocker <mailto:dave@tribalwise.com> >TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com> >tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850