Re: Substantial nomcom procedure updates (Was: Re: Consolidating BCP 10 (Operation of the NomCom))

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 9/16/14 10:37 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
My statement was in no way an NIH response. I stated factually that the
issues being discussed are well known and they are challenging.  I also
noted that ICANN solved part of the problem covering travel expenses.
  In no way did I make any statement with regards to whether we ought to
talk to ICANN.

You also made no statement about your intention to contact ICANN and open a dialog with them. What you did do was attempt to demonstrate your thorough knowledge of the topic, as well as your familiarity with ICANN's solutions; which to me sounds like justification for NOT contacting them. Sounds pretty NIH'y to me, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.

So rather than accusing me of an ad hominem attack (which, FWIW, is also a form of ad hominem attack), why not simply address the question directly? Will you contact ICANN to open up a dialog, and if not, why not?

Doug





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]