<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] GA Credibility.
Well that would certainly keep the numbers down since no newbie
would know who to ask for endorsement.
On 29 May 2001, at 11:59, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> At 21:47 28/05/2001 +0000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> >Roeland,
> >
> >>....... What it also does is demonstrate, for the ICANN, that
> >>general transparency isn't ready for prime-time. It is the strongest
> >>argument against the @LArge that the ICANN has. A demonstration of chaos,
> >>if you will.
> >
> >
> >Any suggestion to change this?
>
> Yes. I have made the (bold?) suggestion in the WG that membership of the GA
> (and especially posting rights on the list) should be endorsed by a minimum
> of 5 other individual GA members. (number of 5 is of course open to debate)
> This would make each poster to the GA list a sort of "representative" with
> accompanying rights and obligations.
>
>
> --Joop--
> Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
> Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
> Developer of The Polling Booth
> www.democracy.org.nz
>
>
> --
> 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
>
--
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|