DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] GA position on the Structure TF report

In a message posted to the IDNO list David Farrar writes:  "There is no way 
at all any individuals constituency would be able to raise funds to match 
what the business groups pay.  If there is ever an individual's constituency 
the DNSO will have to recognise that individuals pay most of their money 
through the registrars, ISPs and registries.  This is one reason I think the 
possibility of having the ALSO perform a dual role as an individuals 
constituency within the DNSO has merit.  It will possibly avoid serious 
duplication of expenses."

The latest recommendation from the IPC to the NC Structure Task Force Policy 
stipulates that ALSO input to the Board is only to be channeled by way of the 
DNSO (in which the ALM would have a mere three votes in a 24-member council), 
and further, "no policy recommendations would come from the ALSO separately". 

This proposition is a blatant attempt to attack the At-Large and should not 
be supported by the GA's representative.

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

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>