Re: [Clarification] Re: [wg-review] [Agenda] Issues List - 4

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@hotpop.com>]

Bravo Cindy!
I hope some of the Task Force Members will care about responding this.

On 03:34 07/01/01, Cindy Merry said:
>And these questions
>don't really ignite the spark of self-interest that causes folks to want to
>respond to them, even if you do know the answers.  So if someone who
>thought I was one of their constituents had ever circulated that
>questionnaire, I wouldn't have even tried to answer it.

Cindy if you have been a member of:
- DNSO/GA
- a DNSO Constituency
- icann-europe
- icann-candidates
- icann-fra
- idno
- wg-review before the end of the 2000 year
this questionnaire has been sent to you one or two times.

Quiote nobody even read it. Roberto Gaetano, Chair of the GA made a huge 
(and IMHO uncessary) job in preparing a draft. Everyone told him "great, we 
trust you". We hope he will evntually send it. They have reminded the 
ccTLDs, the DNSO/BC about it. I responded a few things to the BC if I am 
correct, I do not even now if Maca Jamin got enough responses for a 
synthesis or to forward a file. On ccTLD the response is "could you give us 
the URL, please?".

My feeling are:

1. the questionaire is interesting but is totally out of *non NC members'* 
baskets as it does not start from our most commonly accepted position that 
the constituency and the NC are the problem.
2. the practical presentation is poor. It should have presented as for 
nominations by the Booth. We would have a far better straw poll right now 
with documented comments.

Thank you for your very important genuine input.

Jefsey


--
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