Re: [ncc-charter] new words - where from?

From: Kent Crispin (
Date: Tue Aug 29 2000 - 20:02:41 PDT

  • Next message: Adam Peake: "Re: [ncc-charter] new words - where from?"

    On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 07:28:41PM +0200, Dany Vandromme wrote:
    > On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Adam Peake wrote:
    >> Shouldn't we be using the February 2000 version of the charter as the basis
    >> for amendments?
    > -
    > After I made changes to the initial draft, I would prefer you point out
    > the changes suggested by Raul if they are significant. I would not redo
    > the changes again, otherwise I will not get it done before next week.
    > Thanks
    > Dany

    Dany, there are *many* significant differences, starting with the
    title, and in my opinion we really cannot use the old charter as a
    base. In the interests of time, I have edited your changes into
    Raul's last posted version and posted it on the web site.

    I did make a couple of small changes, and interspersed a couple of notes
    about things that need to be fixed, IMHO. In particular, I marked the
    new text about political parties, since that is a fairly substantial
    addition, and I thought it should be highlighted. I also introduced the
    abbreviation "AdCom", and used it in several places. I reworded the
    segue following the "running mates" proposal so that it just flows
    naturally into the following section, and marked it as an addition
    rather than as an alternate, since the "AdCom selects" proposal is
    not optional -- it is present in all versions.


    Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 29 2000 - 20:04:23 PDT