RE: [wg-c] straw vote -- question one results & call for votes on

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

From the beginning of any discussion on new gTLDs, we have advocated adding
one or two, and evaluating impact, usage, concerns... take the learning,
make necessary adjustments, and then consider what procedures and rules
would be appropriate. How about that as a question? marilyn
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark C. Langston [mailto:skritch@home.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 3:48 PM
To: John Charles Broomfield
Cc: werner@axone.ch; weinberg@mail.msen.com; wg-c@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [wg-c] straw vote -- question one results & call for votes
on 



On 19 August 1999, John Charles Broomfield <jbroom@manta.outremer.com>
wrote:

>	I'd like to know if everyone would be happy about the idea of adding
>a few right now, and looking at what that does INDEPENDENTLY of
what/if/when
>we add later. Maybe some sort of question could be asked in that direction.
>Seeing from the answers that were given, there were a very small minority
>that seemed to say outright NO, but I'd like to confirm that. If most seem
>to agree with putting things in, regardless of the thought of how the long
>term scenario should be and all agree that it's safe to start with just a
few
>and see how that goes, then maybe we can get consensus on the short term
>scenario, and then take it from there. Suggestions?
>

That's not a compromise.  That's an attempt to implement Question 1,
option 1 in the guise of a compromise.  

-- 
Mark C. Langston	     			Let your voice be heard:
mark@bitshift.org				     http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin					    http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA					     http://www.dnso.org