Re: [ga] Danny Younger's opinion about icannatlarge.com

["James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>]

Danny,  As far as I understand, the interm panel for atlarage.com, which I'm
a member of,  hasn't been asked to speak for the at large on these issues.
It has a 90 day mandate to get a structure for itself in place, and hold
another election for a more durable governance stucture.  That's about all
it can do, and if it can do that I'll be happy.   Jamie

----- Original Message -----
From: <DannyYounger@cs.com>
To: <vb@vitaminic.net>
Cc: <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Danny Younger's opinion about icannatlarge.com


> Vittorio writes:  "The Reform Committee is expected to work out practical
> solutions that reflect the overall consensus in the community. It's their
> job, not ours."
>
> That's putting a lot of faith in the same set of people that haven't
> recognized a consensus on seating nine elected At-Large directors, that
> haven't been able to recognize a consensus to establish an individuals
> constituency, that didn't recognize the consensus on the VeriSign contract
> renegotiations, and that haven't recognized the consensus in the .org Task
> Force recommendations.  Their track record for reflecting overall
community
> consensus is horrible, and you are willing to blindly put your trust in
them?
>
> Does the phrase "sheeps to the slaughter" resonate at all?
>
>
> --
> 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