[wg-review] Re: Second Concern on DNSO Review Report version 1.0

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 04:44:29PM +0800, YJ Park (MINC) wrote:
[...]
> Regarding this DNSO Review process in the non-commercail constituency,
> AdCom members, myself, Dany and Vany clearly expressed to you and
> our constituency that AdCom's position was delivered to Review TF
> without pre-circulation in the list with apologies due to miscommunication.

There is no possibility that it was merely a "miscommunication".  The
constituency had just gone through a major discussion of procedures for
resolutions.  And the claim that the message was "just from the adcom
and not really the position of the NCC", and thus didn't need to be
circulated to the constituency is basically an insult to our
intelligence.  

The whole purpose of that message was contained in the last two line,
where it says

"Please accept this as our only official response to the Questionnaire.
 For the last, NCDNHC requests NC to extend working group's deadline."

That is, YJ, when the matter concerned YOUR ambitions for the working
group, the rules we had just spent weeks arguing about were simply
ignored. 

> And then as you know that has been circulated to the members.

Nonsense. It was circulated by *me* when I found it on the Names 
Council archive.  To say I was amazed that the Adcom would do such a 
thing is an understatement.

It is true that the Adcom sent abject appologies to the constituency. 
What else could they do? They flagrantly broke the rules that we had
just spent weeks arguing about.

> Therefore, please withdraw using non-commercial constituency
> as a bad model which can mislead the Board or the public who really
> don't have any specifc details or background on this.

If they had more details and background the point would be even
stronger. 

[...]

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
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