Re: [ga] Re: Last minute changes to Verisign agreements

[Paul Svensson <paul@svensson.org>]

On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Dave Crocker wrote:

>At 05:51 AM 4/2/2001, Paul Svensson wrote:
>>The issue isn't if option C is an improvement on option B (which it
>>apparently seems to be), but whether it's an improvement on option A.
>
>I agree entirely.
>
>>Which means, that even if it's obvious that it's a step in the right
>>direction, it may take more than 24 hours to analyze wether it goes
>>far enough.
>
>Let me save you some effort:  The newest revisions do NOT go far enough.
>
>So is that a reason to reject all of its improvements and, instead, to 
>choose the very much inferior existing contract?

Dave,
you're making no sense.

The board has been very clearly told, by the GA and by the constituencies,
that option B is not an improvement over the status quo.  If then,
as you say, the newest revisions do not go far enough to change that,
how can the existing contract suddenly be "very much inferior" ?

	/Paul


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html