Re: [discuss] DNSO Glitches and process: A report from the DNSO front.

["Cthulhu's Little Helper" <skritch@home.com>]

On 30 June 1999, Javier <javier@aui.es> wrote:


>Mark,
>
>Excellent analysis of the situation.

Thanks.

>
>The compromise of group 1 with group 2, in the pNC, has been to create a
>committe that has to come out, within three weeks, with procedures for the
>operation of working groups. As soon as those procedures are in place, the
>new working groups will comply with the procedures determined by the
>committee. Once the committee reports, the GA will have to be consulted
>before the procedures are finally approved, as with anything else that
>comes out of a working group.
>

To facilitate this process, could you clarify a few points regarding
this group (which is Working Group D, if I'm not mistaken):

1)  Who is currently heading this WG, if anyone,

2)  Who should be contacted if one wishes to join this WG

3)  When and via what media the first(?) meeting of this WG will occur

4)  The exact date by which this WG must have completed its report

5)  In what manner the WG D report will be presented to, and approved by,
      the pDNC and the GA?  (of particular interest, since there are no
      procedures established yet.  We need a 'bootstrapping' process of 
      some form.)

>This will, of course, not make everybody happy, and the criticism (some of
>it in the form of personal insult) will continue in this list, but what is
>at this point very clear is that anybody who wants to participate
>constructively in the process can do it by either participating in the GA
>or in the working groups.

...which are good points.  To further clarify, could you state:

6)  Whether WG D will be tasked with determining the process the GA will
      use to nominate representatives to sit on the Board, as described in
      section (d) of the General Assembly definition at 
      http://www.dnso.org/dnso/aboutdnso.html?

7)  Could you confirm that the GA will be fully constituted by the time
      the WG D report is presented so that it may be agreed upon?


...and finally, would you be willing to address the other issues I raised
in my last e-mail?

Thank you.
-- 
Mark C. Langston				Let your voice be heard:
mark@bitshift.org				     http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin					    http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA					     http://www.dnso.org