Re: [ga] Structure Taskforce - feedback needed on report
At 06:18 7/03/02 +1300, DPF wrote:
>In terms of specific positions it has been my reading of the GA that
>the consensus expressed here has been for:
>- nine instead of six board members
>- no linking of at large eligibility to domain name holdership
>- a low (if any) membership fee
>- a low (if any) threshold/quorum for the at large to be recognised
>(approx 1,000 max?)
I don't think the GA has expressed anything about numbers, but in view of
the current rate of signup on www.icannatlarge.com (300 in 7 days ) I
think 1000 is reasonable.
Therefore : No objections to the above assessment from me.
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html