Re: [ncc-charter] Going the wrong way

From: Milton Mueller (
Date: Wed Sep 06 2000 - 07:03:01 PDT

  • Next message: Rob Courtney: "Re: [ncc-charter] charter - more comments?"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Dany Vandromme"

    > Then, rather than deciding (NCC-CHARTER + eventually adcom) between option
    > 1 and 2, debates went around the word "observer"
    > instead of non-voting member. Then on, discussion is now about eligibility
    > for NCC with respect to possible participation to other constituencies
    > (and vice-versa).

    Yes, this is what happened, and it was a mistake.

    > Sorry to be pragmatic but it seems we should go back ASAP to the proposed
    > charter, substituting only observer with non-voting member if adequate,
    > and decide between option 1 or 2 (Only Vany gave her position about that),
    > and then start the election process.

    I agree totally.

    > (Referring to previous mail, non-voting member means for me NON-VOTING. No
    > point to enumerate cases where it applies: it applies to any
    > decision-making process of the constituency).


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 06 2000 - 07:11:33 PDT