[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ga] The North American DNSO BoD chair

On 13 October 1999, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> wrote:

[...snip accusation of Karl stuffing the GA, and me being blind to it]

But Kent, you yourself have made large noises about support not needing
to come from the GA, and instead from any "dnso-related" list.  As
a potential constituency, the IDNO list certainly qualifies as 
"DNSO-related".  And most of those you claim as participating in 
"stuffing" were either already members of the GA, or of other
constituency lists.

But then, you have no way to prove it one way or the other, and neither
do I, because (if you'll hark back to the archives), there was a request
made that the full subscription list be posted when the vote was called,
so there would be no question over eligibility.

This was ignored, and here we sit, tossing baseless and unverifiable
accusations back and forth.

If the NC had stopped and considered process before going through with
this in its typical rush, perhaps things would be different.  But 
the NC continues to act without regard for these issues, and continues
to brew its own trouble.

Perhaps, one day, the issues surrounding process will be taken 
seriously, if for no other reason than to minimize these problems.
Until then, we get to enjoy one morass after the other, courtesy of
an outcome-oriented NC, willing to ignore the means for the ends.

Mark C. Langston
Systems Admin
San Jose, CA