[ncdnhc-discuss] Draft Agenda for Shanghai NCDNHC Meeting

[t byfield]

apisan at servidor.unam.mx (Sun 10/20/02 at 06:20 PM -0500):

> 1. the "proxy" system has not been clarified enough for the constituency.
> It is very different in the case of the Names Council or any fixed-size
> representative body, where on occasional absence a voter may delegate
> his/her vote to another voter. Here in the NCC the only apparent result,
> as Milton has explained, is an inflated but artificial appearance of more
> people supporting views or resolutions than there actually would be. A
> form of "stacking" which will add nothing positive.

i'm pleased to say that, FOR ONCE, i agree with alenjandro. while i
don't think it's true that there would or could be no positive out-
comes, the general drift of these remarks seems correct. also, i'd
oppose such a resolution for the same reason i was skeptical about
the idea of fragmenting this constituency: the problem at hand is
one of focus and consistency, so procedural mechanisms or organiza-
tional changes that move in the opposite direction seem unwise.

cheers,
t