Re: [nc-intake] Re: NC agenda

["YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>]

Thank you, Elisabeth and Philip,

I still think the below link is needed, though.

3. http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc04/msg00557.html
email that contains a motion to the NC related with DNSO review
process should remain for further discussion.

There is no harm to have more info to have better understanding.
============================================
In this process, I want to make a motion to the representatives of
the other constituencies as follows and NC as a whole;

"When the constituency position or discussion update is presented
to the Review Task Force, it would be helpful to see the archived lists
or some proof of evidence how the position or discussion has been
proceeded within the constituency properly."
=============================================

Thanks,
YJ

> Elisabeth
> the agenda is fine but I do think there are too many URLs under item 6.
> These are only some of the exchanges on this topic and do not really help
> clarity.
>
> What would be useful is:
> 1. the e-mail that Caroline referred to in her original motion.
>
> 2. YJ's  e-mail in which she describes the WG outline - you have this-
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc04/msg00497.html new WG proposal
> by YJ Park
>
>
>
> Philip.
>
>
>
>
>
>