Re: [wg-review] Straw Poll - ML

[Eric Dierker <Eric@HI-TEK.COM>]

I am so uncomfortable with this concept.  don't mistake my meaning as that I
think you are wrong Mr. Meyer.  That is why I think it makes me uncomfortable.
The proposal for the GA as is currently being thrown about suggests that these
type of lists continue, and they should.
Mr. Sheppard should support the continuation of this group.

Sincerely,

Roeland Meyer wrote:

> Hello Joanna,
>
> I appreciate the thought and agree that WG-Review needs to be an on-going
> process.
>
> That said, I disagree that it can be effectivly kept open, long-term. It is
> just too much against ICANN interests (for the current ruling party).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joanna Lane [mailto:jo-uk@rcn.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 12:02 PM
> To: wg-review@dnso.org
> Subject: [wg-review] Straw Poll - ML
> Sensitivity: Confidential
>
> Option 1) WG-Review Mailing List should be closed on April 16th
> Option 2) WG-Review Mailing List should be kept open
>
> Please take the time to make your voice heard on this issue, by voting on
> the ML and at the straw poll running at http://www.internetstakeholders.com.
> .
>
> Thank you,
> Joanna
> --
> 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