RE: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] questions appearing to have n ear consensus

[Phil King <yofelipe@excite.com>]

I certainly hope not, too easy for multiple answerers.  But good for getting
idea of how rough leanings of opinions are.

---------


On Fri, 29 Dec 2000 18:45:01 -0500, Marsh, Miles (Gene) wrote:

>  I was not aware that we were to use the poll as a method to determine
consensus.
>  
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: Greg Burton
>  To: wg-review@dnso.org
>  Sent: 12/29/00 12:03 PM
>  Subject: Re: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] questions appearing to have
near consensus
>  
>  I believe that we have near-consensus on answers to the following
>  questions.
>  
>  2. Does the current constituency structure impact the effectiveness of
>  the 
>  DNSO and NC?
>  	yes, negatively (14 agree, 1 disagree, 2 don't know)
>  
>  5. Does the current process promote the development of overall community
>  
>  consensus?
>  	rarely at best (9 no, 6 rarely, 1 sometimes, 1 generally)
>  
>  6. Are all DNSO interests adequately represented in the existing 
>  constituency groups?
>  	no (0 yes,  12 no, 5 suggesting other interests)
>  
>  9. Are there important parts of the Internet Community that may need
>  better 
>  representation?
>  	yes (12 with suggestions, 3 maybe, 0 no, 2 no answer)
>  
>  10. Should there be a constituency for individuals?
>  	yes (15 yes, 1 no, 1 no answer)
>  
>  12. Should the constituencies be reformulated?
>  	yes (3 no,  12 yes (differing answers as to how), 2 no answer)
>  
>  Regards,
>  Greg
>  sidna@feedwriter.com


Yo, Felipe (I, Phillip)
Phil King
Butte America
(The Richest Hill On Earth)





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/