Re: [wg-review] Names Council input

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 02:03 21/03/01, babybows.com said:
>"  Her comments suggest that we have
>an additional option to consider - keeping an improved version of the status
>quo structure.

Agreed. If you consider my conception of the DNSO, actual changes are minor 
in term of structure. The changes are in the way things are made. So it 
means that a progressive change can be made in adding, not in changing. If 
the new fomula is accepted the old one may become obsolete or adapt. 
Transition may be as smooth as long and as rewarding to individuals as we 
want.

Four steps:

0. The DNSO/GA Chair is elected by the GA. What is quite agreed now.

1. the DNSO/GA secretariat accepts to register the Centers of Interest, to 
link them to its own site and to provide them with a mailing list under the 
DNSO. I created a few of them as examples with a working method Greg Burton 
has found of real interest.

2. A coordination list between CI chairs is created where Constituencies 
and NC have one representative. CI are approved by the GA in using Joop's 
boot. Accepted CI should be on the NC budget for their petty management costs.

3. The GA Mailing list is considered as a common forum to discuss/access to 
Centers of Interests and general issues (like VeriSign today).

4. the WG-Review stays as the permanent place where to discuss new eideas..

Then you leave it to live and develop into something more mature. Probably 
the first change will be an auto-review of the NC which may survive as a 
NDSO foundation helping new CI to develop.
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