Re: [wg-review] Objectives of this WG

[Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com>]

On 07:22 PM 1/3/01, YJ Park said:
>Now you are trying to merge this WG's effort in the name of one of inputs
>rather than respecting their own independent review which should go to the
>Board as reference at least.
>
>Therefore, this should be discussed and decided by this group as part of
>dnso review what kind of mechanism should be set up between NC and WG.

Those of us who joined the group prior to Philip's entry clearly had an 
idea of what we were getting into. I believe most, if not all, of us 
understood the mandate to be to produce a comprehensive report on the TF 
questionnaire. In order to do that, some meta-questions have been discussed 
as well. These larger questions can allow us to determine if the questions 
produced by the TF will lead to productive answers for the board. Despite 
the apparent chaos, progress has been made on several fronts, including 
process towards prioritizing a selection of questions to be addressed.

While Philip's point may be technically correct regarding the NC's goal for 
this WG (I have no way of knowing if it is, at this point) it comes too far 
into the process to be effectively implemented. Additionally, insisting on 
such an incredibly limited role for the WG will do nothing to ameliorate 
tensions around the NC. It would only continue to provide evidence that 
despite it's intentions the NC is not facilitating consensus within the DNSO.

Therefore, I urge that this WG continue it's already undertaken course and 
produce a comprehensive report for the Board,  with an expanded timeline. I 
also urge the NC to formally agree to this while reserving the right to 
point out that this was not the original mandate of the WG , should such 
notice prove necessary to anyone's comfort level.

Regards,
Greg


Regards,
Greg

sidna@feedwriter.com

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html