Re: [ga] "to represent the unrepresented"

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

on 8/8/01 3:42 PM, DPF at david@farrar.com wrote:
> IMO there must be two
> stages to the process.  The first is that either the NC or the Board
> should give approval in principle that there should be a Registrant's
> Constituency in the DNSO.  This is not a complex matter and to date
> no-one has managed to argue why individual registrants should not in
> principle have the same rights as business registrants and
> organisation registrants.
> 
> *If* such approval in principle is given with perhaps a deadline for a
> detailed proposal then a detailed proposal you shall have.  Myself and
> many others will spend dozens of hours on coming up with a superb
> proposal.  However what motivation is there to do so when previous
> attempts have all ended in nought.
> 
> DPF
> --
> david@farrar.com
> ICQ 29964527

David,

I believe there has been a shift in position over the past few months at top
level on issues including an Individual's consituency. That should be enough
motivation to prepare documentation and submit to Montevideo.

In Stockholm, the Board acknowledged the motion presented by the GA for an
Individuals Constituency, but requested further details be presented at
Montevideo about what they were being asked to approve, which does not seem
to me to be an unreasonable request. Following that, Karl Auerbach has
prepared a Board resolution, which could be regarded as a further incentive
to prepare some proper supporting documention. Now we have Peter De Blanc, a
member of the NC and declared supporter of an individual's constitunecy,
pressing for supporting documents, again not an unreasonable request and an
incentive to make a more formal submission through the GA at this time.

If you are prepared to spend dozens of hours preparing a superb proposal,
that is great news. Count me in. And if you want to use one of the idle
sub-lists for the purpose, it is ready and waiting.

Given the timeframe before Montevideo and the need to accomodate
longstanding supporters of an individual's constituency in any formal
proposal made, I would invite the IDNO to submit clean copies of all
relevant documents to the GA list for further discussion and debate. Of
course, more than one proposal may go forward, but ideally, we may reach
consensus following Best Practice procedures of the GA, which are now at our
disposal. 

There really is no excuse for not producing this stuff IMO.

Regards,
Joanna 

  

--
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