On Oct 27, 2010, at 1:39 PM, kris foster wrote: > I see things like this as a fail safe, and not a requirement that the board > consider each individual individually.
I agree with Kris. While I wish that we could simply say that there are no formal qualifications for membership, I think the language is necessary to (1) define membership for legal reasons and (2) as a way for the organization to protect itself from potential outside influences should that ever be necessary. >From a practical standpoint I think anyone who wants to become a member will, in all likelihood, be granted membership. DW (speaking only for myself) _______________________________________________ Nanog-futures mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
