RE: [ga] Abusing consensus in the Transfers TF
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]
|> On Behalf Of Joop Teernstra
|> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 11:56 AM
|> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
|> Cc: Joanna Lane; DannyYounger@cs.com; email@example.com;
|> firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
|> Subject: Re: [ga] Abusing consensus in the Transfers TF
|> Sure, sure. Individuals have to be kept speaking in isolation.
|> This is why a registrant organization such as the IDNO , where
|> could be elected by a credible mass of registrants and speak with a
|> mandate, had to be fought tooth and claw for 3 years or taken over.
Sour grapes JoopT, as the IDNO membership finally refused to accept your
dictator role within the organisation?
|> Just be very cautious in accepting the "mandate" of the supply
|> now have captured the Individual Domain Name Owners constituency.
There has not been any capture. The IDNO is finally in the hands and
control of the membership. Instead of being dicatated to by you,
members now have the opportunity of progressing.
|> Elections for an IDNO ExeCom have now been "set aside".
I'm sure the GA does not wish to hear about the internal workings of the
IDNO, so I will not go into the issues involved with current processes.
Those wishing to get a balanced view of the organisation can always
follow up on the appropriate forums.
Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html