Well we are cooking now. This is the way.
I think that regional representation is a must.
We need have a final proposal 1 and a final proposal 2. Then expose this, somebody
must support the proposals and then all should vote.
UPADI
Carlos Vera Quintana
President
"Dr. Nii Quaynor" wrote:
> > I was triying to build a consensus and you can colaborate too.
> >
> > The proposal 1 is not the original proposal from nobody.
> > It is the combination of suggestions from Kathy, Vany, Milton, David and
> > you, most of those had differents points of view in the begining.
> >
> > I apologies because David and you remained supporting your proposal
> instead
> > of offer a new redaction.
> >
>
> Raul,
>
> Part of the problem IMO is that we did not allow the concepts to crystalize
> before committing them to text and to make things more difficult, proposal 1
> was modifed in mid stream on a fly and put to a vote against proposal 2
> which was still at the concept stage. What is needed is:
>
> 1. the original concept of running mates in proposal 1 should be scrapped
> (if not already)
> 2. it should be clear that 5 persons are elected; one from each region to
> adcom. the top 3 are NC and the remaining 2 are adcom and also act as
> alternates to the NC members.
> 3. it should also be clear that NC members *dont* vote as individuals but
> vote as adcom desires (or we dont have a constituency; we have self serving
> individuals and it will be bad)
>
> [ any reasonable wording that is simple works for me]
>
> Nii
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: cvera@INTERACTIVE.NET.EC
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1729M@lyris.isoc.org
--- 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 - 13:20:38 PDT