Re: [wg-review] Bill of Particulars
Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
> If we were to begin to list the problem areas with the DNSO structure (as
> Milton has wisely suggested), what would that list look like? Should we see
> if we can agree on some particulars?
I'd add to that list the point I made last week about the process not
allowing or encouraging compromise. The substance of the post is at:
It's a good idea to gather these in one place. I'll add my point to the list
> 1. Unrepresented constituents
> 2. Unrepresentative constituencies
3. Process does not encourage compromise among parties
with competing positions.
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html