[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ga-full] RE: [ga] Proposal: WWW / slashdot
At 12:16 28.02.00 +0100, Per Koelle wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> > At 05:44 28.02.00 +0000, Jean-Michel Becar wrote:
> > >Harald, Michael,
> > >
> > >But the way the At Large members is registered via this Web Interface
> > >be an example for the GA membership.
> > another idea I had - what if we considered an activated At Large
> > necessary and sufficient for voting rights in the GA?
>This is silly. There ARE 2 kinds of membership:
>One for the At Large, and one for the DNSO GA !!!
>If we dont have this separation the at-large will be able to vote
>NINE members in the Board and CONTROLE the DNSO NC and therefore also
>be able have their voice heard this way.
I wasn't thinking of merging them, but to say that the verification
functions of the At Large (seeing that they're not onerous) were a
prerequisite for being a GA member.
Any open organization that does voting can be controlled by any determined
large group of people; if both the GA and the At-Large membership are open,
and they're different, it's because of what people choose to join.
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html