[nc-review] Proposal to Review Task Force

["YJ Park (MINC)" <yjpark@minc.org>]

Hello Review TF members,

This is part of Jan. 15, 2001 Report on Review Working Group.
I am going to send the whole report, if it is set within Jan. 15
(California midnight)

Thanks,
YJ

======================================

1. To Set Up Procedure within the Task Force is Urgent.

As member of Review TF, the decison or request of Review TF comes
in the name of Review TF from Chair prior to the consultation with
members of Review TF reminds this group that we need procrdure in place,
first. Otherwise, this group cannot get nowhere. To do that end, WG D is
to present its final report to the NC as soon as possible.

To operate this premature decision-making process in the NC without its
well-established set of rules might cause more serious malpractice.
Therefore, to propose a working model to the NC is more important than
to present the recommendations on DNSO Review to the Board at this
juncture.

2. Consensus-Building Process Among Review TF is also Needed.

As soon as Review WG report is delivered to Review TF(on Feb. 20),
Review TF members are expected to participate in Review TF's report which
should outline TF members' consensus. To that end, Chair is expected to
make every effort in consulting with every member of Review TF since this is
small group composed of seven NC representatives from each constituency,
GA Chair and several observers.

Therefore, it is reasonable for Review TF to publish its interim report to
the Board when Review WG group can provide its position paper.
Furthermore, to make the Review TF report more agreeable, Review TF
is to have a teleconference to reach its own consensus before its
finalization.

3. Review TF's Position is to Encompass Review WG's Consensus.

Review TF welcomes any input from both inside and outside DNSO.
However, not to be misled by any interest group, it is to have a session
to validate each constituency's position paper or contribution paper
by members of Review TF.

Every constituency paper is needed to show how many members
have participated in DNSO Review discussion through its own mailing
list and and have voted on that matter together with the number of vote
result. Otherwise, it is difficult to be viewed as constituency position.

Review TF report is out, the report should be vetted by members of
Review TF. Otherwise, it cannot be recognized as Review TF report.
==============================================
                                   [End of Message]