[wg-review] Rough Proposal A & B
I think my last comment was misunderstood. I think all proposals that are
presented should be considered by this WG. I am hoping, however, that the
consensus proposal include *realistic* recommendations. We should be
mindful of the practicalities of what we are doing and why. A WG within the
DNSO does not strike me as the proper forum for certain reform efforts.
Having said that, I certainly respect the opinions of those who disagree.
There are 2 rough proposals on the table. I recommend we consider expanding
upon those or eliminating one and/or have additional rough proposals
> We seem to have to rough proposals on the table regarding
Rough Proposal A
> - Elimination of formal/official constituencies and replacement of
> that with a one-person-one-vote mechanism (my approach)
Rough Proposal B
> - Creation of objective criteria for the recognition and continued
> existence of official constituencies (including those already in
> existence) - individuals and small businesses being two examples of
> constituencies that would probably quickly arise. [addition] There
should also be
semi-yearly evaluations that an official constituency continues to meet
> My own sense is that continuation of the status quo is a non-starter.