Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (99205)	2/7/2005 11:28:57 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

Sisyphean Musings - Easongate Update IV Folks, I apologize for not posting regularly throughout the day. Here are my thoughts, with about 10 hours to go before speaking again to Mr. Adams. This is how I interpret the Chatham House Rule. The panelists control what may be "quoted" from the session. Mr. Adams has already stated that he is bound by this Rule. Rebecca MacKinnon has provided two VERY valuable "inside baseball" insights. The first time I read about some WEF panels being "off the record" (they could be summarized but attribution required explicit permission from the panelist) was at Rebecca's blog. That was extremely helpful to me when Mr. Adams brought up the Chatham House Rule. Although I wasn't familiar with the term, I had a good idea where he was going and could talk intelligently about summaries, quotes, attribution and permission at the WEF. I had read the session summary, knew who had already been quoted, and could press him on alternatives. I think that made an impression on him. The second insight was the confusing nature of which sessions are on or off the record, the "official guidelines" and Mr. Adams' response to Rebecca's direct query about the "Easongate" session in Sanada 1 and 2 - an "on the record" room.