On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 08:16:50PM +0100, Dany Vandromme wrote:
> In Kent's view, there is a strong confusion between the fair representation
> of all constituency components (the election of the AdCom and the NC
> members is taylored for that) and a more operational aspect, which is to
> allow some NC members to have an alternate to act on behalf of them, as a
> temporary substitute. Bringing the same sensitivity to designate these
> temporary alternates as to formally elect the NC representatitive (for a 1
> year period of time) is just out-of-proportions.
Eh? Out of proportion? Proposal one is for a FORMAL ELECTION of the
alternates, with complicated rules of succession if someone resigns;
there is absolutely no question that Nii's proposal is less overhead and
far simpler than all the distorted baggage necessary to support alternates.
> Alternate means that it could happen that they could be asked to act
> as.... Not more!
Precisely the case in Nii's proposal, as well...
> In that case, it is worthwhile that titular and alternate know each other
> and can share views and exchange about problems....
Why is it that you assume that the AdComm members and the NC members
can't know each other, share views, and exchange about problems? I
think it is GOOD THING that the NC reps and the Ad Comm members should
work together more closely.
Kent
-- Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain--- You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: Kent@SONGBIRD.COM To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1729M@lyris.isoc.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 09 2000 - 13:20:37 PDT