Re: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Report requested by NC
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000 12:04:37 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 12:01:36PM -0700, Greg Burton wrote:
>> At 11:16 AM 12/29/00, Kent Crispin wrote:
>> >Please note that the purpose of this WG is to identify ways to make
>> >the DNSO more productive. That purpose is not at all served by trying
>> >to change the fundamental structure of the DNSO.
>> Unless the "fundamental structure of the DNSO" is part of the problem. Many
>> people seem to think it is.
>"Many"? Many people think the earth is flat, you know :-)
Actually many do not. Your analogy is flawed in that only a minuscule
percentage of the world's population (also known as the lunatics)
think the world is flat. Suggesting that those who think the DNSO
structure is wrong are a similar group is not credible as so far it
seems the only people who have defended the current structure are
members of the Names Council. Perhaps they are the flat earthers :-)
>There is no doubt that the constituency structure is imperfect, just as
>there is no doubt that democracy is imperfect.
Again a comparison that is unfair - it suggests the level of
imperfections are equivalent when I submit they are not. Not even
having a right of participative voting for individuals is a far larger
imperfection that say an argument over whether the US should have an
<david at farrar dot com>
NZ Usenet FAQs - http://www.dpf.ac.nz/usenet/nz