Re: [council] Re: REPRESENTATIVES TO NC'S TASK FORCE

[Rosa.Delgado@sita.int]

Hello Milton,

The reason I did not mentioned other consituencies it was because I wanted
to propose first to NC and the same could be replicated to the others as
consequence. Thanks for this clarification and I fully agree with you.

regs/Rosa
________________________________________________________________________________________

From "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu> on 21 June 2001
To : <philip.sheppard@aim.be>, <Rosa.Delgado@sita.int>
Copy To : <council@dnso.org>, <Richard.tindal@neulevel.com>,
<RCochetti@verisign.com>
Subject : [council] Re: REPRESENTATIVES TO NC'S TASK FORCE


Rosa:

I would support this, but would insist that this capability
be applied in a uniform and nondiscriminatory way to ALL
constituencies.

So, if by "our" you mean "DNSO constituencies" I support this.
If by "our" you mean gTLD constituency" I oppose it. But I am
sure you don't mean the latter.

>>> <Rosa.Delgado@sita.int> 06/21/01 10:25AM >>>

"that the Names Council recognises as practice our ability to select
non-Council members to serve on Council task forces, committees and WGs"