Re: [ga] Transfer TF / deletions / WG

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

As much as this would be an interesting issue to tackle, I'd have to say
that it is squarely out-of-scope for the Transfers TF.

I would like to see the NC create a separate effort to evaluate this issue
however. If this is truly to be a consensus effort as Chuck has indicated, a
wider net needs to be cast to gather input from interested stakeholders.

-rwr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Dierker" <eric@hi-tek.com>
To: <wessorh@ar.com>; <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 8:55 PM
Subject: [ga] Transfer TF / deletions / WG


> As a candidate for the TF on transfers and as
> an interested party on deletions I would ask
> if this would not be a proper area for the
> Transfer TF.
>
> (don't think for a second I suggest any reduction
> of the great input here - in fact I would hope it
> would increase it)
>
> Personally I would like to see our chair use a sublist
> and set up a real WG on this issue, all members welcome
> and an extra 5 posts a day on that sublist, {or no limit}
> for both transfers and deletions.
>
> Earlier today Mr. Gomes stated clearly it was not
> a done deal.
>
> Isn't a deletion really an automated transfer.
>
> I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
>
> Sincerely,
> Eric
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>

--
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