Re: Reminder: Poll about restructuring options

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:30:50 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > The poll about restructuring options: > > is open until Wednesday. The poll asks whether one has an opinion and, if one has an opinion, whether if favors either of t

RE: Time horizon, contingencies, and destinations (was scenarios 0 and C)

Again, inline. At 12:36 PM -0700 9/27/04, Tony Hain wrote: Ted Hardie wrote: > ... >There is nothing explicitly proposed in C, but run the thought experiment of >what would happen if a major contributor to the administrative entity >threatened to pull funding if X didn't happen on the technica

My opinion on administrative restructuring: Scenario O

Hello everybody, though, I have been silent mostly throughout the discussion on the mailing list (playing mostly catch up with all of you on the mailing list), I do have an opinion. First of all, I would like to state my respect for everybody writing documents and doing the ground work for us bei

RE: Time horizon, contingencies, and destinations (was scenarios 0 and C)

Ted Hardie wrote: > > ... > >There is nothing explicitly proposed in C, but run the thought experiment > of > >what would happen if a major contributor to the administrative entity > >threatened to pull funding if X didn't happen on the technical process > side. > >It is not hard to get to the poin

Re: Level of consultation (Re: a note about the scenarios)

From: "John Loughney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I have heard that there have been some problems with the Secretariat, I have not been privy to the fact that the IETF is going to hell in a handbasket. Are things so dire? I have been much more concerned about other problrms in the IETF, though I'm feelin