Re: I think you're wrong - Re: WXW GA Director - Re: [ga] Reply to William Walsh

[Sandy Harris <sandy@storm.ca>]

Derek Conant wrote:
> 
> The GA active participants here cannot establish any valid GA positions individually.  It
> takes a record of coordinated effort to show valid positions.  Without a record showing
> coordinated effort and the valid consensus, GA positions are without merit and easily
> challenged.
> 
> It is far harder to challenge an organized structure consisting of 9 GA Directors that
> have determined the GA's consensus and positions through its review of verifiable
> information and comments submitted to the GA forum.  It would be easier for GA Directors
> to rationalize GA information.
> 
> The purpose of the GA is to establish GA positions based upon valid consensus, and to
> present its findings to the NC for review.  What I have proposed in suggesting 9 GA
> Directors does not conflict with the purpose of the GA nor does it conflict with the DNSO
> Charter (Where does it conflict with the DNSO Charter?).
> 
> Furthermore, what I proposed will stabilize and enhance the GA's performance and possibly
> save the GA from the NC's chopping block.

This is nonsense. 

We already have the NC, responsible for "managing consensus" and generally directing
the DNSO, and the GA chair and co-chair responsible for co-ordinating things within
the GA. We emphatically do not need another layer of directors.

If the NC or the chairs aren't doing those jobs, then let's talk about how to
change that, but let's not complicate things with more 'directors'.
--
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