FW: Fact checking of GSO Review report sections by constituencies

[Adam Peake]

At 5:29 AM -0400 9/4/06, Milton Mueller wrote:
>A well-done summary of the situation, Adam. You are one smart guy.



Thanks prof.

I hope LSE's raw research data and some kind of fuller/background
report will be made available.  It's not that I don't trust anyone,
and I don't believe a group from a place like LSE could be bought off
(anymore than a reputable US university located in a chilly part of
upstate NY could), but this stuff does sound like it's getting a
little narrowed. Person(s) controlling the TOR have a great influence
on the output.

Adam



>No, to be less cynical, I presume that the constituency will "request"
>that the changes be made and the LSE group will decide whether to make
>the requested changes. The issue is whether that decision comes after a
>few beatings and trips to Guantanamo.
>
>>>>  Adam Peake <ajp at GLOCOM.AC.JP> 9/2/2006 4:08 AM >>>
>So.  Let's say I think a particular constituency is completely
>useless: captured, undemocratic, not transparent ...  basically a
>sham of what a constituency should be.  I've responded to the LSE
>survey, sent comments, etc.  Tried to provide good clear criticism.
>
>Now my comments, and perhaps many many similar comments, will be
>"corrected" by a single person from that constituency?