[wg-review] Michael Sondow & Miles Marsh wrote...

[Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

"Personally, I think that it is you, the techies, who should be
excluded, since you are obviously unfamiliar with the human
implications. M.S."

Mr. Sondow, I for one would be interested in hearing your angle on the "human implications" of this technology.  

Miles Marsh (aka Gene) wrote: > 
"Exclusion of "real end users" in the manner you suggest is not
> necessarily a bad thing, in-and-of itself.  Certain functions of ICANN > would be inappropriate for comment from those
 unfamiliar with the technical implications."

Mr. Marsh, I wonder if you are including lawyers and large multinational corporations among your "real end users"?
owever
As for the rest of this consensus building work group, it seems to me that the most relevant points to date were made by Graeme Levin when he wrote: 
"I have no experience at participating in such working groups, but I would have thought at the very 
least there should be an agenda and a schedule of topics to be discussed. Also a 
summary by the chairman from time to time. And then a vote."

This mailing list is chaotic at best, futile at worst.  The idea of a January 15 deadline strikes me as odd- especially when you consider that most of us on the receiving end of all this info need at 
least that much time to ruminate over its implications.  Between my life and work, I've done a pretty good job of keeping track of the many issues which relate to ICANN.  However, its things 
like this mailing list "work group" which make me feel like some Sisyphus chump rolling the boulder to the top of the hill and then having to do it all over again.  I'm beginning to wonder if it's not 
intentional...  There must be an extension to the January 15 "deadline".  I put forward a motion for an extension of at least two weeks to make up for the holiday scheduling of this List.


Sotiris Sotiropoulos
          Hermes Network, Inc.
          Toronto, Canada
          sotiris@savilerow.com