Re: Second draft of CyberCrime Treaty Statement
On Wed, May 10, 2000 at 04:19:58PM -0400, Steven M. Christey wrote:
| I agree with David LeBlanc and Gene Spafford that we should come up
| with a final draft, then ask people to sign it. I wasn't clear,
| Here's what I see as a plan of action, with some overlap between the
| different items:
| 1) Participating Board members finish and agree to a statement
| 2) Each participating Board member works with their organization to
| see if the organization itself can support it
| 3) Participating Board members endorse the agreement, as individuals
| or as an organization-wide endorsement
| 4) Identify a coordinator for outreach efforts
I'm comfortable with Spaf taking on this role.
| 5) Each participating Board member performs their own outreach to
| their own contacts, and works with the coordinator, who maintains
| the "master list" of endorsements.
I think that the contact list should be professionals, but question
how wide we want to make it? Do we look for (say) 50 high profile
people outside the board, or accept the potential of 5,000 signatures
from bugtraq/ntbugtraq? I think that the latter is less compelling
than the former.
| 6) If any serious, near-unanimous concerns are expressed with the
| statement, *consider* making modifications.
| Below are some of my editing comments on the draft. Dave Mann, are
| you coordinating your later drafts with Adam Shostack? Who is the
| "official holder" of the draft at this point?
Dave and I coordinated a bit. I'm offsite tomorow and Friday, and so
I can't hold it.
I agree with all the cuts made to my draft.
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."