<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [registrars] Recaputulation of nominations.
- To: <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [registrars] Recaputulation of nominations.
- From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:47:44 -0600
- Cc: "'Bruce Tonkin'" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Registrars Constituency'" <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <3FAB9A33.3080300@tucows.com>
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I agree Ross, and would do the same.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 7:12 AM
To: Tim Ruiz
Cc: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: Re: [registrars] Recaputulation of nominations.
On 11/7/2003 7:01 AM Tim Ruiz noted that:
> Agreed. I do not want to be on multiple task forces.
I don't think that its physically possible ;) Personally speaking, if by
some fluke of the voting process one us were to be elected to more than
one spot, it would seem to make sense for the candidate to stand aside
on the additional spots in favor of the next most popular candidate - I
certainly will be if I end up in the position Bruce describes.
--
-rwr
"Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions.
All life is an experiment.
The more experiments you make the better."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|