Re: [ga] Constituency Definitions

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>]

Joop, Joe, and all.

>At 18:31 13/09/00 -0700, Joe Kelsey wrote:
>
>>Perhaps we need to form a WG to flesh out the matter officially.
>>
>
>We surely do. This is why the GA in Yokohama asked the NC to authorize 
such
>a WG.  The GA does not have the power to create WG's.
>
>Any news about its progress, Roberto?
>

I recently complained about the lack of enthusiasm ;>) in the Task 
Force. Maybe the limited number of contributions lately was due to the 
Labour Day Weekend in the US - it seems that YJ an myself are the most 
active.
I also reported that the debate is alive and well in GA + NonCom lists, 
and proposed to start the WG ASAP, so that all can participate in a 
common forum.
Anyway, the agreement is that I (and YJ) produce a summary of the 
discussion on the subject in the next days. I will report the interest 
in the GA, the focus on the establishment of an Individual DN 
Constituency, and with your permission I will not mention the fight over
 IDNO :<(.

I assume that we still have consensus in the GA on the formation of the 
WG, so I will push for this.

Regards
Roberto
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html