RE: [IDNO-DISCUSS] New name

Joop Teernstra (terastra@terabytz.co.nz)
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 09:30:40 +1200


At 11:20 9/07/1999 -0400, Srikanth Narra wrote:

>
>Do we need an other name - one for constituency and other for association ?

These are questions for all of us to decide.

There are advantages to having a slightly separate identity for the
Association.
After all, the constituency is just that, an IDNO constituency.
But the Association is something that we build and own together. Something
that can survive the storms and legal icebergs that are in ICANN's path.

I would like to have wide input from everyone and then put the alternatives
to the vote.
As we are now designing logo's and such, this is the right time.

>can we not just go with idno till we again movementum ?

Sure, we can. But even then we still have to decide on what to do with the
CA name.

I lack depth in
>terms of how the contituencies are expected to be structured..are they two
>different things - the constituency and association ?
>
>should we need two names..i believe like linux movement our kiwi logo should
>belong to all of the idno movement..
>
I agree. This is why my favourite name for the Association would be the
AIDNO, or even better, "the IDNO Association".
I see it as the Association that makes the constituency happen.

>after penny's drawings idno as a name looks like a hands down choice to
>me(here I go again ! should be subject to vote ofcourse )..
>

We should not tamper with the IDNO sequence of characters. We have the
idno.org and we are already on the map as IDNO.

--Joop Teernstra LL.M.-- , bootstrap of
the IDNO Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.idno.org
-
This message was sent via the IDNO-DISCUSS mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno-discuss" to
majordomo@idno.org. For more information, see http://www.idno.org/