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.
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 email@example.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 29 2000 - 20:04:23 PDT