Re: [wg-review] A good start

[Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Marilyn et al.,

I don't think Danny was suggesting that Jefsey's
proposal was for "blowing up the constituency
structure".  I think what he intends is that
Jefsey has managed to create an outline based on
the existing Constituency model which appeases
even some of the proponents of the most sweeping
changes.  Jefsey himself states that his proposal
is no radical departure from the current model,
but is in fact based on the existing framework of
reference, albeit a modified version.  

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Working (Interim) Chair, WG Review

P.S. I have moved the DNSO proposal collation Web
pages to the following address (due to technical
difficulties with the prior address): 
http://www.atlarge.ca/DNSO.html

Apologies for any inconvenience.

P.P.S. I do think we're off to a good start, and
that we should keep the ball rolling
constructively.  I think we can definitely outline
some common ground which will help us to move
forward in forging a legitimate and viable set of
recommendations to the BoD.

"Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" wrote:
> 
> I don't support blowing up the existing constituency model, just because
> there are issues or concerns by some.  In fact, the DNSO is a "young"
> organization, and needs time to mature and change, as needed, to represent
> the full set of stakeholders.
> 
> My goal is to be part of constructive change.
> 
> Marilyn
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: babybows.com [mailto:webmaster@babybows.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 8:21 PM
> To: wg-review@dnso.org
> Subject: [wg-review] A good start
> 
> Jefsey Morfin has presented a reasonably well-defined structural model that
> incorporates the views of many in this Working Group that supported the
> abolition of the Constituency model, myself included.  I am confident that
> in the time allowed, it will be possible to make whatever necessary
> refinements are required by this model to ensure adequate representational
> mechanisms.
> 
> As part of this working group will now focus on this first proposal, it will
> become increasingly important for advocates of the
> expanded/more-representative Constituency model to present their case as
> well, so that we may all ultimately weigh the relative merits of each
> clearly-defined and well-articulated proposal.
> 
> I remind you, in the end, we will need consensus.
> 
> --
> 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
--
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