RE: [discuss] Individual representation

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

Until Friday, there was no regular agreed upon place to meet. To then
claim that lack of participation, in that place, before Friday, means
anything, is extremely disingenuous. This is exactly what is happening
here and these are exactly the sorts of arguments that I heard last
Friday, at the NC meeting, from Javier and others.

I say again, building the organization needs to be priority ONE, before
any and ALL other activity, ICANN BoD requests not withstanding. The
Working Groups can wait.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-discuss@dnso.org
> [mailto:owner-discuss@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
> Randy Bush
> Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 8:45 AM
> To: Cthulhu's Little Helper
> Cc: discuss@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [discuss] Individual representation
>
>
> > I would argue that the people physically present in any meeting
> > are a proper subset of the mailing lists
>
> not clearly.  while there is significant overlap, i believe
> that not all
> meeting attendees are on this mailing list.  hence, the
> position taken at
> the nc meeting was that the ga is the list, not physical presence.
>
> and yes, outreach is a serious issue.  it will probably
> remain so for many
> years.  suggestions and constructive actions in this area are
> worthwhile.
>
> randy
>