next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects On Mon, 8 May 2000, Jeff Warnica wrote: > There are no plans to force this change immediatly. In fact existing > accounts could stay this way indefinitly. There is a significant > difference beteween depreciated and discontinued. No new entries are > being made, and over the next few months existing (active) IPs will be > massaged over to member accounts. And someone (who?) has presumably canvassed them all about their willingness to be so 'massaged'? Nice to take their interests into consideration in this way. > IPs that are inactive will be deleted (or arcived) with the exception of > those with some clear historcial value (the websites of conferences that > CCN sponsored, for example) And who will make and implement this decision? How and to whom has such authority over IP policy and administration been delegated? > The office has not explicitly done that. Since there are no new IPs, there > are no new IP agreements and there has been no need to make any > notifications. New entities walking in the door are given/sold/rented > 'normal' accounts (with associated privilages). Flying in the face of of CCN Editorial Policy. > This was mandated at the bord level by the IP chair, and in fact was > initialy oppopsed by the lower half of the office staff (at least (?)). See Doug MacCann's rejoinder to this. > > What is the IP Database? <extensive snip> The issue avoided here is this: who decided that such an approach ought even to be taken? Such decisions have been outside of established IP process, without consultation with stakeholders, and (it seems) without sufficient technical consultation or wherewithal. > > Anyone. Board Members, Office staff, CCN volunteers, Technical People, > > etc. Any bona fide CCN volunteer with a legitimate need or desire to help > > in this area can be given HTTP authorized access and use the Database. I'm > > not sure how many current people have such access (David Murdoch could > > probably supply a number) but I'd guess that it is in the order of two to > > three dozen people. > > There is no reason for anyone beyond a couple of people (ie whoever is > working in the office, and a Trusted To The Nth Degree assistant) to have > access to the administrative side of things. And there are very good reasons > to explicity deny everyone excpet a even more select group of people access > to any physcial addresses, phone numbers, billing contact names (as they > differ from the tech contact). > > Moving away from the IPDB frees up editors from tedious administrative > duties, and will allow them the ability to focus there attention at the > developement of the yahoo style index. Aye, and here's the nub of it. ;-> Who was it that decided upon this exclusive, centralized view of IP relations? And without consultation among the stakeholders? And contrary to CCN Editorial Policy? Who has decided that contrary to the philosophy, ideals, technical structures, history and processes of the past seven years of the organization that we will suddenly discard this approach and go with another? Who and on what basis has made this decision on behalf of what others might find 'tedious' or not? <extensive snip> > There is no more IP process. There are no new IPs. Talk to you committee > chair. Succinctly put. And who was it, prithee, that decided (and on what basis) that the IP process was at an end? Who decided (and on what basis) that there would be no more IPs? Kind regards, Christopher Majka _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Christopher Majka <aa051@chebucto.ns.ca> Editor: Culture & Philosophy - Chebucto Community Net, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. URL = http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Culture.html "Culture is the sum of all the forms of art, of love and of thought, which, in the course of centuries, have enabled man to be less enslaved." -- Andre Malraux, 1957 _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._..
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects