Re: [wg-c] IMPORTANT: DRAFT WG-C REPORT

["Milton Mueller" <mueller@syr.edu>]

Obviously it is incumbent upon Jon to obtain the feedback and support of the
working group, but a formal vote is not necessary.

There is nothing in the DNSO bylaws, the charter of this group, or any
informal consensus established, that the Working Group chairs needed to have
a vote to submit a report.

If you disagree with aspects of the summary, please articulate them. That
would be a lot more productive than raising purely procedural issues that
have no standing in the WG's existing rules.

If you go back to the formation of this group, some of us (myself included)
advocated doing things by vote, but that position was not accepted. Instead,
we accepted a kind of IETF-like approach, which gives the WG chairs broad
latitude to interpret and articulate the consensus of the group. As a matter
of fact, Kent was one of the advocates of that position.

At the time, there were only 15-20 people in the WG, and voting on
everything might have been possible. With over 100, it doesn't seem to be.

No such vote took place over the interim report.

----- Original Message -----
From: "bob broxton" <broxton@erols.com>
To: <wg-c@dnso.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2000 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: [wg-c] IMPORTANT: DRAFT WG-C