<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: Does ontogeny recapitulate philogeny? (was Re: [wg-review] who is a legitimate member of this list?)
Totally agree and it was also stated that this WG was to get the widest
possible consensus. That means all-inclusive. That means everyone and
anyone. So any exclusion including that of excluding anyone from nomination,
voting or posting is not what was asked for.
Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Sondow" <msondow@iciiu.org>
To: "DNSO Review List" <wg-review@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:44 PM
Subject: Does ontogeny recapitulate philogeny? (was Re: [wg-review] who is a
legitimate member of this list?)
> The DNSO is supposed to be an agglomeration of all Internet
> stakeholders. Therefore, this list should include all and any
> Internet stakeholders, so that the defective constituency structure,
> which doesn't include them all, can be repaired.
>
> Anything else is just a reaffirmation of a defective system.
>
> M.S.
> --
> 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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|