[governance] nomcom's creteria - was multistakeholding

[William Drake]

On 6/7/08 6:00 PM, "Avri Doria" <avri at psg.com> wrote:

> 
> On 7 Jun 2008, at 02:11, Parminder wrote:
> 
>> 
>> What gratefulness are we showing to this nomcom, and what message
>> are we
>> giving to the future ones, by chastising it for doing what the group
>> clearly
>> meant it to do... In light of above, I cant support this statement.
> 
> 
> you cannot support support a statement that the next nomcom should
> follow the written  rules and publish its criteria before its makes it
> selections?

I think this was covered in paragraph 14.

Ok, so we have two sides insisting on polar opposite solutions that have not
been and probably will not be acceptable to a number of others, and also
insisting that we continue talking about this despite pleas from others to
please make it stop.  My suggestion is that those who wish to continue the
debate and work toward an unambiguous resolution now form a working group,
take it off list, sort out the issues, and report back to the full igc with
recommendations for collective adoption.  Everyone wins, no?

Best,

Bill


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance