On Fri, May 28, 1999 at 11:29:03PM -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> >> The current DNSO is now mainly a trade organization.
> >
> >Thank Milton and Michael.
>
> I'm not interested in getting into a pissing contest so I'll state
> my observations once and don't care to discuss it. I was in attendance
> for the NC meeting, as was Esteher and John Klemsin. Ask them if
> my observation is correct.
>
> Michael Sondow had the first NC propoasl. The ISOC/Heath proopsal
> was second and had 30 ISOC/IAHC friendly organizations as signatories.
>
> The Mueller/ACM proposal was supposed to be a compromise.
>
> I watched Sondow and Mueller make all sorts of compromises I
> didn't see Heath make any. I talked to him about it and
> was told "my constituents won't accept this". I asked how
> he knew this without asking them or explaining the situation.
>
> In the end the dispute was about one paraghraph - how to
> elect the names council memebrs. Heath wanted the 30 orgs
> he signed up to elect them, many other peple pointed out
> one names council member from each of the 3 groups invoilved
> in this seemed reasonable.
Except when you realize that the three groups weren't really three
groups -- Mueller at best represented a single organization; Sondow
represents an organization with no members.
I wasn't there, but I was watching, and what you say above is not
what was said in the televised report. The competing proposals were
not about Names Council members, but about some sort of membership
committee; and the two proposals were as follows:
1) (Sondow/Mueller proposal): The committee would be Sondow, Mueller,
Heath, and Gaetano. No elections; just picked by fiat.
2) (The Heath proposal): The committee would be elected by the
founding members of the NCC.
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
