[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ga] General comments on the agenda
This is consistent with Javier's suggestion that I talk to my NC
representative. I promptly asked him who my representative was. I have
never received an answer to that question. It has been more than four
days since the question was asked.
In order to have an objection mechanism one must have a process. Would
someone kindly point me to the documentation outlining such a process,
or ANY process?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Mark C.
> Sent: Monday, July 12, 1999 8:18 AM
> To: Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] General comments on the agenda
> On 12 July 1999, "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law"
> <email@example.com> wrote:
> >On the telco today someone (J.Sola?) said that there have been no
> >objections to the working group agenda. This is optimistic.
> I too have witnessed objections to the agenda, and was aghast
> when this
> was said (I also cannot remember whether it was Javier or Amadeau who
> said this).
> I'll be a bit less polite than Michael here. How dare they make a
> blanket statement like this. There was a very strong implication that
> there was a solid mechanism in place for raising such objections.
> Has anyone read about any such mechanism? If so, where is the text
> found? I would think that common sense would dictate that said
> mechanism be made clear at the same time the agenda is announced.
> Mark C. Langston Let your voice be heard:
> firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.idno.org
> Systems Admin http://www.icann.org
> San Jose, CA http://www.dnso.org