Re: [ga] Joop's motions

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Joop Teernstra wrote:

>  At 13:36 13/05/01 -0700, William S. Lovell wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> But first, since from Florida we know how voters can get confused, I
>> would
>> strongly urge that the desired representation for individuals be
>> given the term
>> "Individuals Constituency = IC."  If this group has too many "fumble
>> fingers"
>> in it, as I can sometimes be, IDNH and IDNO will get confused, and
>> people
>> may be yelling "yeah, yeah" for one when they mean the other.
>
>
> That is right and this is the reason why I have proposed calling it
> the IC.

All,

My original intention in proposing the title "IC" *was* to clearly
disassociate it from the IDNO.  I had explained this to Joop in an
offlist mailing back in the wg-review, just as we finished the final
proposal paper.

Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos



>
>
>
>
>
>> But as to the substance, the incorrect premise is that to form an IC
>> one goes
>> through some list of existing bodies that have advanced themselves
>> as
>> candidates.
>
>
> That would indeed be a false premise. However, I do not advocate it.
> If the IDNO has to die in order for an IC (with a universally approved
> structure---tiny problem: how are you going to get that) to take it's
> place, that is fine with me.
>
>
>  --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--the Cyberspace Association andthe
> constituency for Individual Domain Name OwnersElected
> representative.http://www.idno.org

--
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