<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">There is much implied history here. We should discuss a redirect with them.<div><br><div><div>On Oct 11, 2012, at 6:20 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-family: 'Courier New'; font-size: 15px; ">There is a problem with the business and board people generally considering NCSG to be a “dumping ground” for people who aren’t allowed to be represented anywhere else. It is completely unfair for the CSG to lock people like this out simply because they won’t allow a new constituency to dilute their votes. It would be all too convenient for the business interests to push all the diversity into the NCSG and refuse to allow it themselves.</span></span></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>