[governance] Caucus Statement: endorsement

[Nnenna]

Hi people

The draft, as it is, is okay by me.  I  thought it would have been posted.  On another note, may I  nominate Bill Drake?

Best

Nnenna


----- Original Message ----
From: Ralf Bendrath <bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:44:00 PM
Subject: Re: [governance] Caucus Statement: another proposal


William Drake wrote:

> Anyway, I think this and any other tweaks are probably moot, as a dialogue
> among five or six people isn't a basis for caucus statement.  

Just FYI: My recent silence does not imply I do not endorse the general 
effort and the direction of the statement - quite to the contrary. I just 
have to finish some other business before coming to Athens. I guess 
several others have the same problem. ;-)

So, whoever has time to work on this: Please go ahead with the statement 
and try to make it an agreed IGC statement by all means. Parminder's 
proposal sounds good to me. No opposition over a defined period of time 
implies consensus.

On the process: The "calling rough consensus" function of any coordinator 
is only needed if there are dissenting voices, right? That's why it's 
called "rough". If nobody objects, I find it hard to not move forward.

Best, Ralf

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20061025/44f31e5c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20061025/44f31e5c/attachment.txt>