At 23:21 20/06/1999 -0700, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
>
>>
>> 4.11. Loss of membership. Rules with regards to loss of membership will be
>> drawn up by an elected membership committee for approval by the general
>> membership . Such rules will assure a Fair Hearing of all parties. Sole
>> criterion for loss of membership should be "actively hurting the
>> constituency".
>>
>> [RMJM] I'd like to re-phrase this, just a tad, to;
>
> 4.11. Loss of membership. Rules with regards to loss of membership will be
> drawn up by an elected membership committee for approval by the general
> membership . Such rules will assure a Fair Hearing of all parties. Sole
> criterion for loss of membership should be direct action against the best
> interests of the IDNO or blatant conflict of interest with the charter of
the
> IDNO.
>
>
>
Thanks Roeland. Yes, that looks better.
It will always be a matter of judgement what action against the best interests
of the IDNO is, (up to the Fair Hearing panel)
and conflict of interest with the charter (I would rather say: with mission
and
purpose of the IDNO).
Could you come up with an extreme example?
--Joop Teernstra LL.M.-- , bootstrap of
the Cyberspace Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.idno.org
--=====================_163566881==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
At 23:21 20/06/1999 -0700, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
- 4.11. Loss of membership. Rules with regards to loss of membership will be drawn up by an elected membership committee for approval by the general membership . Such rules will assure a Fair Hearing of all parties. Sole criterion for loss of membership should be "actively hurting the constituency".
[RMJM] I'd like to re-phrase this, just a tad, to;
--=====================_163566881==_.ALT--
-- This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz. For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/