Re: [wg-review] reporting

[Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

1/31/01 10:16:56 AM, Eric Dierker <ERIC@HI-TEK.COM> wrote:

>I do not want to suggest any impropriety on behalf of Ms. Swineheart for
>actions taken before, or her current intentions. But I do want to
>comment that her most recent post to this WG was a prompt response,
>clear and unambiguous.  Basing my judgment upon what has been reflected
>by others I do not believe this type of response would have been
>forthcoming prior to the input from this WG.  This is a positive
>movement toward correcting the problems being discussed in this WG, and
>should be recognized as such.

I beg to differ.  this is another butt-covering exercise, intended to elicit even more
input which will then be selectively "processed" for further misrepresentation.

This WG must disassociate itself from Ms Swineheart's "reports" and if need be, from
Ms. Swineheart herself.  Her agenda is clear.  Please read Greg Burton's painfully
reconstructed Backround of the DNSO review Process.  If that doesn't make things
patently clear... I am afraid nothing will.  Read it (Parts 1 & 2) and then comment on
Ms. Swineheart and her activities to-date.  

Anyhow, I have put forward a motion to vote for WG disassociation from the "report"
drafted by Ms. Swineheart.  A vote which should include a list of those who voted.

Seconds?




Sotiris Sotiropoulos
          Hermes Network, Inc. 


--
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