|Response from Andrew Freeman (from the ACS mailing list)
||[Oct. 15th, 2009|08:40 pm]
This is a response from Andrew Freeman to Jim Stewart's video via the Australian Computer Society ELSIC mailing list
I write purely in my role as a member of ELSIC, and FACS, given I have no offical role in this debate within the ACS, unlike in the late 1990s when I was Director of the Community Affairs Board. I found the video interesting. My recollection from the time was that the media initially interpreted some comments made about supporting some of the objectives of the Bill, as meaning support for the Bill. As the debate evolved it was made clear that some of the objectives of the Bill would not be achieved by the proposed Bill. ELSIC was heavily involved in discussions on the Bill within the ACS at that time, if I recall correctly at the time. My sense of what I have read recently is that the question is being asked what is it hoped to achieve by the current proposals relating to blacklists and such like, which are currently be trialed. That seems to be a reasonable question to ask. My sense is also that if ELSIC wishes to input to the evolving view of the ACS on the matter, I can see no problem with that, via the Chair of ELSIC, in liaison with the Director of the CAB, as occurred in the late 1990s too, when an arguably somewhat analogous situation arose, when there was arguably a mis-understanding of the ACS position. I would not see public criticism of the approach which has been taken up to this point on the issue, clearly by people of goodwill and expertise within the ACS, as being helpful in moving the issue along.
Andrew Freeman, FACS
15th. October 2009
Note this video was recorded in 1999.