Re: [wg-d] Names Council Motions

[Dan Steinberg <dstein@travel-net.com>]

let me get this straight. Are you suggesting we develop a 'process'
that they can/will use to resolve their issues?

I cant go along with manipulation of constituency strucure to break a
logjam.  Can you suggest some other process angle we could look at?
I'm having a hard time thinking of something we could do that would
be:
a) useful
b) part of the mandate
c) something we could defend as "the right thing to do"
d) not something that would have to be undone later for the other
issues 

I dont want to be obstructive. Just not sure what we can do here.



Randy Bush wrote:
> 
> > It is not WG-D's job to resolve issues that are being worked on by other
> > Working Groups.
> 
> agreed.  but in this case it is not the issue, but *the process*, and that
> is precisely wg-d's job.
> 
> randy

-- 
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin
Box 532, RR1		phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec		fax:   (819) 827-4398
J0X 1N0			e-mail:dstein@travel-net.com