<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ga] Open call to join
- To: eric@hi-tek.com
- Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [ga] Open call to join
- From: "J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 12:18:16 +0100
- Cc: ga@dnso.org
- In-Reply-To: <3E1204A0.8ADC63A8@hi-tek.com>
- References: <5.0.2.1.2.20021231174444.0216f1d0@pop3.paradise.net.nz><5.0.2.1.2.20021231174444.0216f1d0@pop3.paradise.net.nz><5.1.0.14.0.20021231154957.023d9e60@mail.club-internet.fr><5.1.0.14.0.20021231191425.02dec990@mail.club-internet.fr>
- Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
At 21:57 31/12/02, eric@hi-tek.com wrote:
>My question remains;
>Why has the Panel not done anything toward making this at-large into a
>formal group
>as they were elected to do? And why do the refuse to answer this
>question?
Because whatever/wherever you want to incorporate you need to tell what
for. This means a mission and a working style. Up to now no one was ever
able to sort it out. The Richard/Vittorio/Joop/Judyth proposition may help
to address that. We had a first try as a single standalone group (Joanna),
then an ICANN lobby (Hans) now we may perhap's proceed to the support of an
@large diversified community (we still have to sort out the
differing American Fededral top-down ("umbrella") and the European
Confederal peer tro peer ("concerting relations/"concertance") concepts, we
see in the proposed wordings.
jfc
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|