RE: [nc-intake]

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@netsol.com>]

I am comfortable with this as long as agendas and in particular votes are
identified well enough in advance, something that this group is working on.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@aim.be]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:12 AM
To: nc-intake@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [nc-intake]


If we keep the debate going for a few more months on non NC proxies for
Chuck and the gTLD, the problem will fix itself!

Of course, if Chuck can make each meeting until then, it's a non-problem.

So, I  agree with Caroline's line of thinking, its best to stick hard and
fast now, without opening a window for the future.

Moreover, I see nothing wrong in the concept of giving a proxy to a member
of another constituency with clear guidance of how you want the proxy vote
cast.  With an efficient intake committee the issues will be well-known in
advance and proxies can be instructed accordingly. I would be happy to proxy
for Chuck with due instruction.

Philip