[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-c] An amazing lack of activity.
At 10:33 08-09-1999 -0600, Jim Glanz wrote:
>Dear Members of WG-3:
>I, too, have been watching from the sidelines. You will see I spoke up once
>and decided that there were too many chiefs in our WG to have a positive
>flow of info and direction. All the issues I had have been addressed and
>addressed again and again and again. The patient has been inspected and
>dissected far too much and may not survive the life-saving operation. It is
>time to make a decision. Draw the line in the sand on those issues that are
>contested and decide that the majority on either side is what the WG works
Thank you for your excellent analysis of the present situation. I have
proposed a Votebot on the issue, with four options. Those options were
refined by Dan Busarow:
[How do we proceed]
 Option 0
 Option 1
 Option 2
 Option 1/2
Where Option 0 is no new gTLDs, Options 1 and 2 are well known and Option
1/2 is for gradual opening as in Option with the potential for further
opening on the *successful* launching of the initial few gTLDs.
If no option gains a majority, we eliminate the least popular one or two
options and Votebot again. I suspect we can have a majority, perhaps even
a super majority by the second Votebot.
> Do not allow retroactive discussion of those things that created or
>caused the division between WG members once this decision is made. It is
>that simple. We worry far too much about where the journey takes us without
>ever deciding to leave. We miss so much along the way.
It is my opinion that some participants are committed to keeping us from
*ever* leaving on our journey. Sad.
Robert's Rule of Problems.
(The sum of Hypothetical situations/The sum of Real problems)>=10
(c) Robert F. Connelly, 1999
Quotation, with attribution, authorised without written request;-)