Re: [wg-review] Constituencies yes, Names Council no.

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 06:08 22/03/01 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:

>Consensus-based effort? You can't possibly be referring to this WG. 
>There are fewer active participants on this list than there are members
>to the NC, and the NC members are elected representatives of sometimes
>very large constituencies.  Members of this WG represent only
>themselves.
>

Please. Let us not go into this "active-participant" stuff again. 

People are sitting around the table. Some talk, others listen attentively.
They speak when they have something to say.
All are active.

For the moment, I am waiting for comment from  members of the BIZ
constituency (Marilyn?) and the non-commenrcial constituency (Vany?) on my
compromise proposal
the create a joint Domain Name Holders' constituency that should hold the
balance of the NC seats.

If there is no further support for this idea , we note that in our report
and move on.




--Joop--
Former bootstrap of the CA/idno
       The Polling Booth 
www.democracy.org.nz/vote1/

--
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