RE: [registrars] Consensus Building

["Bhavin Turakhia" <bhavin.t@directi.com>]

Michael,

thanks for your kind words.... I have already given my vote and am thankful
to Ross and Elana for putting in so many hours of their time in this. I
agree with you specifically since I do not want their efforts going to
waste. We SHOULD approve this document ASAP. However as David points out
this doc addresses the HOW to do a transfer issue but does not address the
UNTIL WHEN is trfer possible issue. The doc I believe would be complete if
it addressed that too.

Meanwhile my vote is on "APPROVE" for the doc itself

Bhavin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 9:08 PM
> To: registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: [registrars] Consensus Building
>
>
> I would like to follow-up on the comments of Larry and Bahvin. I
> would first
> like to note that they are two registrars whose comments I take very
> seriously. Unlike a number of registrars that I have gotten to
> know through
> numerous face to face meetings, my primary interaction with Larry
> and Bahvin
> have been through email and telephone conversations. I believe their
> contribution to the constituency have been insightful and valuable.
>
> I understand their concerns about potential limitations of the current
> Registrars XFER document. However, this document is not intended to be a
> static document that will never change. Instead, it is intended to be a
> dynamic document, that represents an historic first step in this
> constituency's effort to establish a meaningful code of conduct.
>
> I believe it would be beneficial for the constituency to look at
> history and
> learn from our past mistakes. Over a year and a half ago, the registrar
> constituency set forth to develop a code of conduct/best
> practices document.
> This started off as an ambitious process to quickly implement a
> set of seven
> core principles. After over 12 months of heated internal debate the final
> document was less than originally intended and it basically withered and
> died on the vine.
>
> The Registrar Executive Committee was aware of these previous shortcomings
> and our purpose with this first ballot is to take an important step in the
> right direction. Attempting to incorporate at this time your well thought
> out and reasoned comments may unnecessarily delay the adoption of this
> historic document.
>
> I encourage all registrars to continue to discuss potential
> enhancements to
> this core document. However, at the end of the day I need all
> registrars to
> exercise their right to vote. If you believe that this document
> is a step in
> the right direction then vote by approving it. If you believe that this
> document is not in the best interest of the constituency then vote by
> disapproving it.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>