Re: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Rough Proposal E - Add New Constituencies

["Chris McElroy" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

That makes sense to me. We can try it. So this is a second, if that is a
motion.
Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Burton" <sidna@feedwriter.com>
To: "wg Review list" <wg-review@dnso.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 12:24 PM
Subject: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Rough Proposal E - Add New
Constituencies


> From Jefsey:
>
> The WG-Review has noted that several groups of stakeholders
> had not the constituency the importance of their issues deserves.
>
> This mainly includes the individual domain name holders and the
> new specialized TLD applicants. To present concrete propositions
> towards a quick aggregation of these two constituencies, the WG-
> Reviews wants two specialized sub-Working Groups to be formed
> by people seconding this motion, one for IDNH and one for STLDs.
>
> Their mission will be to report this WG before Jan 8th the targets
> these two constituencies will pursue and further on to prepare - if
> they so decide - a letter to the BoD and to the Staff to initiate their
> Constituency building process. Their conclusions and their letter
> will be included in the WG-Review (interim) reports as soon as
> made available.
>