[wg-c-3] Re: [wg-c] Re: [wg-c-1] WORK: Question #1 New GTLDs

["Siegfried Langenbach" <svl@nrw.net>]

Kent,
In my opinion you made a good judgment.
I agree to continue on wg-c@dnso.org
I also noted that there is a confusion on the lists, peoples mails are bounced,
I am even not sure that my will arrive :-((
siegfried

On 14 Jul 99, at 7:15, Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 02:19:13PM +0100, Ivan Pope wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Yes, these do appear to be foundational questions.
> > > 
> > > I also agree.  Notwithstanding Javier's suggestion that is 
> > > thread belongs in WG-C-3,
> > > I think it's impossible for us to make our recommendations in 
> > > a vacuum.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sense! I have no idea why there are three non-connected bunches of people
> > all (maybe) discussing parts of the whole. 
> 
> My impression is that general discussion should take place on the
> wg-c list, and that the wg-c-n lists are for actual document
> drafting.  We seem to have a ways to go before we start drafting
> anything, and therefore, almost all the discussion at this time
> should be taking place on the general list.
> 
> I also note that there is significant overlap in the membership of 
> the three subgroups, and a significant overlap in subject matter, at 
> least at our current level of generality.  I also note that some 
> topics are more fundamental than others, and further, that people's 
> familiarity the topics varies substantially.
> 
> Therefore, may I suggest that we move essentially all discussion to
> the wg-c list for the time being?
> 
> Further, I note that there is a rough natural priority in topics -- 
> the question of whether there should be new gTLDs is more 
> fundamental than which gTLDs, and, therefore, we should probably 
> concentrate more on these more fundamental questions.
> 
> Is there consensus on the notion that we should move most discussion 
> to wg-c for the time being?
> 
> -- 
> Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
> kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
>