Yahoo news [news.yahoo.com]
Other critics have complained that many decisions take place behind closed doors, with minutes from meetings often late and incomplete.Twomey defended the extent to which ICANN discloses its dealings but acknowledged the available materials are "not easy to understand." He said one of ICANN's top priorities will be to make such issues and decisions easier for participants to digest.
I've yet to see public evidence of the content or substance of the so-called extensive and detailed discussions that went into the proposed .info, .biz and .org registry agreements.
I've said it before and will say it again: How on earth can the public meaningfully participated in ICANN's policymaking, decisionmaking and governance UNLESS ICANN puts the detailed record of the basis of their proposals on public display?
Transparency? Ya. Why not?
I'd like to know "why not"? I suspect the real reason is an attitude problem: "We know better. We're smarter. IF we give ground now then you - the public/government - will feel entitled to give more input in the future."
Hey, if it's too much work to be transparent then a) give up the job; or, b) vote yourself a raise so you don't begrudge the time you have to put in to do the job right.
Hey, maybe I should claim full credit for it in my blog, since, you know, I wrote a letter to the Department of Commerce and encouraged others to do the same. So, logic suggests that it's all my doing, right? ;)
"We know better. We're smarter. IF we give ground now then you - the public/government - will feel entitled to give more input in the future."
Somewhat typical of governments. Why is it so hard to "serve the public trust"?
It's a shame they don't see it as a potential win-win scenario. If they allow people to give feedback and they act upon it quickly, they can establish trust and possibly gain more benefits from the people they serve.
Oh well.
Dave Z
