Re: [ALSC-Forum] SLASHDOT

[Karl Auerbach]

On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Bret Fausett wrote:

> Esther Dyson wrote:
> > so, please send an article to Slashdot and let's see if we can provoke some
> > comment/interest.  That would be a useful action.
> 
> This was already discussed on /. yesterday, in "ICANN Mulls Poll Tax,
> Representation"
> 
>    http://slashdot.org/yro/01/11/06/1343226.shtml

ICANN has been the subject of several /. discussions over the last 12
months.  It's all there in the /. archives; anybody can look at 'em - even
the ALSC.

Alan Levin is correct in describing /. as often having more than a veener 
of unhelpful commentary.  (I'm being very euphemistic. ;-)  However, /. 
does have a wide base and if one elides the non-helpful content there is 
much that one can learn.  Of course /. would be but one source of data. 

Which brings us to the foundations of the ALSC report:

Creative thinking is a wonderful thing and those who engage in it deserve
to take credit for their inventions.  I do believe the ALSC ought to take
a bow, drop its cloak of humility, and stop attributing some vague
"consensus" as the source of their creations.

I would hope that when a study group such as the ALSC does claim
"consensus" or "non-consensus" that it produces the objective facts upon
which that claim is based and describes the methodology through which
those facts were ascertained.  Otherwise an observer, such as myself,
could conclude that there is nothing there except smoke.

The NAIS report at http://www.naisproject.org/report/final does a much
better job in disclosing its methodology and data, and is thus made much
more credible than the ALSC's work.

		--karl--