Re: [wg-review] DNSO recommendations

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 01:31 16/03/01 -0500, Sotiropoulos wrote:

>3) Those in favour of modifications to the
>existing structure (i.e. creation of additional
>Constituencies to be grafted into the current
>organization) without much change to the overall
>structure.

I think we had several sub-options here.
a. adding an Individuals constituency (taking the NC to 24 seats)

b. making the GA itself into a constituency  (taking the NC to 24 seats)
(Greg's proposal, which seemed to be somewhat shot down by the NC in
Melbourne)


>4) Those in favour of a restructuring of the DNSO
>as a whole, according to a novel set of
>procedures/principles.
>

c.  creating a super Name Holders constituency (9 seats), to be balanced by
an ISP/IP/registrar/registry industry (9 seats) with an elected Chair as
casting vote.
There is much detail to be fleshed out for this option, first of all the
agreement of the Business constituency. 
I hope to hear more from Marilyn, if she has discussed this option within
her constituency.
The Biz constituency is still struggling with an image that small
businesses are not represented and being part of a Name Holders
constituency would help.

--Joop--
Former bootstrap of the CA/idno
       The Polling Booth 
www.democracy.org.nz/vote1/

--
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