RE: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Weinberg document

["Judith Oppenheimer" <joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>]

> to repeat my broken record, it makes more sense to document problems at
this stage than to propose specific constituencies or structural
solutions.>

Agreed.  Is this constrained only by time, or what ... ?

Judith


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg-review@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-review@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Milton Mueller
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:41 PM
> To: wg-review@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Weinberg document
>
>
>
> The discussions of Jonathan Weinberg's analysis of DNSO seems
> to me to be on the right track. I would formally move that we
> use this document as a starting point for a report.
>
> In a few days I could supplement it with more specific
> information about the problems in the non-commercial constituency.
>
> There have been discussions within the constituency of the
> gap between civil rights/civil liberties groups and
> education/research networking organizations. A civil
> rights/civil liberties constituency is a natural counterpart
> to the Intellectual property constituency - it makes no sense
> to have one without the other.
>
> But, to repeat my broken record, it makes more sense to
> document problems at this stage than to propose specific
> constituencies or structural solutions.
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html