Re: [ga] Re: Additional Questions for our Board Candidates

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Jefsey,

You are right on this matter and your *election* through the GA should be a fact.

If the others do not campaign here they must be doing it elsewhere that is not
open and transparent.  Perhaps the members of the Watchdog committee have their
own candidate in mind?  I will remain open but only on the list, if response to
this is not forthcoming by the other candidates then we cannot trust them.  I am
very saddened by these nefarious actions.

Sincerely,
Eric

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> Dear Danny,
> your questions are most welcome. I happen to be the only one - unless I am
> mistaken - to have responded you first shoot. This went so unnoticed that
> you do not even mention it.
>
> I would therefore suggest that - since you are very good at that - you
> would keep a comparative table of all the received responses with links to
> the sites of the candidates. We could repeat the link to that page in our
> mails.
>
> IMHO the election period is not only a time where you select one person,
> but where you can find sparing partners to debate of common interest
> subject. My personal aim - whatever the result of this selection - is that
> several issues may progress, such as:
>
> - Internet Users Constituency,
> - Individual and Corporate Constituency
> - DNS Futures Constituency
> - analysis of the "me/we" model implications for ICANN and DNSO management
> - a Community Management System specifications
> - respect of the RFC 920 moTLD
>
> This is why I lobby for the vote of the NC to be taken after Montevideo.
> This way Montevideo will be an opportunity for the candidates not known by
> NC Members (Joana, Eric and me) to meet them f2f in calm since the
> endorsement period will be finished. This would also prevent divisions in
> the DNSO representation over the decision when we need to be united, and
> the same would avoid the all the possible embarrassments and loss of future
> authority that a monkey Director would be exposed to in such a public meeting.
>
> I will address your today questions in another post.
> Regards.
> Jefsey
>
> On 05:23 10/08/01, DannyYounger@cs.com said:
> >It's time that we started hearing from our Board candidates.   If they intend
> >to represent the DNSO, they should, at the very least, be responsive to the
> >GA.  We have already submitted four questions to our Board candidates; here
> >are some more... let's hope we get a few more replies...
>
> <snip>
>
> --
> 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