Re: [council] Please make comments on

[KathrynKL@aol.com]

To All:
I am glad that YJ has started the ball rolling on the agenda.  I think she 
has an important point that we need to circulate the NC agenda to the GA and 
our own constituencies in advance, so that we can get their input and better 
frame our positions.  I also think that YJ was not aware of the US national 
holiday... :-) 

I also want to express strong endorsement for inclusion of YJ's point number 
4 about relations between the WGs and the Names Council and how these 
relations have been hurt by the NC resolution about the WG-C proposal.  
Whether we like it or not, the NC resolution has created tremendous bad 
feeling.  

YJ is in a unique position to comment on this bad feeling as she is co-chair 
of the WG-E on outreach.  If people do not feel that their voices are being 
heard, they will not spend the months and thousands of email messages to 
engage in the substantive debate of the Working groups. 

It is Extremely Important that this discussion take place at the NC meeting.  
That it has been initiated from outside the US and from co-chair of the 
Outreach Committee, alone, makes it important.  That it is an important issue 
that runs to the working framework of the DNSO and the NC/WG relationship is 
additional rationale. 

I also do not think that we are so far from the "self-reflection" that Ken 
proposed in his email.  This discussion can open that self reflection 
process.  I have placed the two proposals below.  I look forward to this 
discussion.

Kathy Kleiman

YJ Proposed: 

> 4.The relations between WGs and Names Council
>     based upon responses from WG-C.
>     1430 - 1530
>

Ken Proposed:

<<after almost 2 years of DNSO operation I feel it would be a good idea for
the names council to consider a little "self reflection" and take a close
look at how we can make this body which represents such a diverse set of
interests sharing a universal commonality  more efficient and effective in
the future.
>>