[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination

To: ga@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:32:21 -0800
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9911190813170.9525-100000@crom.tallship.net>; from idno@tallship.net on Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 08:21:19AM -0800
Mail-Followup-To: ga@dnso.org
References: <199911191903.LAA17854@agamemnon.home.com> <Pine.LNX.4.04.9911190813170.9525-100000@crom.tallship.net>
Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org

On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 08:21:19AM -0800, idno@tallship.net wrote:
> We could always send JW and Lord Baptista up as
> nominees. I'm not suggesting that, but something llike that could limit
> the pool and ineffect gives us the control we desire to choose from our
> one two or three favorite candidates. 

Note that this is a very strong argument against any fixed number of 
nominees being sent.  

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
  - From: <idno@tallship.net>

References:
- [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
  - From: "Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>
- Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
  - From: <idno@tallship.net>
- Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
  - From: <idno@tallship.net>

Prev by Date: Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
Next by Date: Re: [ga] proposal
Prev by thread: Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
Next by thread: Re: [ga] Sims' legal advice to the NC/Process predetermination
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread