[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 firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html