Past week shown that lack of understanding of the past and anachronisms could harm the today debate. I would suggest we consider an History effort. The very participants commonly writing their own mutually cross-checked memoirs. A part from a pure historical aspect the rationale is:: 1. we need cooperation here. Inappropriate comments down consider their authors until corrected. Something logic permits in technical areas, but impossible in historical areas. Helping avoiding them is making ourselves a good service. 2. this is an unique opportunity for the historic science: historians could be happy to help us and to monitor such an effort, developing new methods for our time and for the nets. 3. we deal with decisions having a long technical + usage cycle. Only History can deliver the experience we need to understand and to repeat successes and to avoid errors. 4. we share different cultures and visions of the network. Helping them to be better known and understood by others can only help a more constructive and less emotional debate. 5. in many areas of the networks (WIPO, ICANN, alt(sic)roots, ccTLDs, GAC, DNS, e-economy, protocols, etc.) history plays an important role as legitimacy, jurisprudence, usage, etc. we need comprehensive pictures, archives, comments by the concerned people; etc. to follow on them. We could call and support a commonly accepted historians effort to build a chronological tree from 1960 to now, where participants could attach and cross-check recollections, provide archives and document the then prevailing environments. jfc