-=> On 12-25-03  08:17,  Peter Knapper <=-
 -=> spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: region 25 <=-

 PK> P4 Section 8.1 Initiation. That section ends... 'wish to 
 PK> consider a proposed new version of Policy.' Not just a 
 
 DS>    That can easily be interpreted that all the RC needs to say to the IC
 DS>    is "I want you to consider a proposed new version of
policy" without
 DS>    being specific as to exactly what that version is -- i.e. an
 DS>    expression of a desire to formulate a new version.

 PK> Then what PURPOSE is served by having the RC's say "do whatever you
 PK> like with  policy, we think its time for a change"?

  The purpose and effect of such a statement would be up to the IC,
  according to his authority to interpret policy.

 PK> Yes, Section 8 can be interpreted a number of ways, however 
 PK> my conversations with other RC's suggests that few think 
 PK> there is a real need to change Policy, and the RC's read 
 PK> Section 8 as meaning "the RC's consider the same Policy 
 PK> Document that is to be put before Fidonet *C's". 

   Understand.  Some feel that way, and others take the more liberal
   interpretation.  The interpretation that matters is the one the IC
   puts on the words of current policy.
 
 
 DS>    Some RCs have in fact already made such a statement 
 DS> to the  DS>    IC -- just not enough to move forward.

 PK> I actually see another potential problem here, no formal method has
 PK> been set  up to count the RC vote...
 
   That would be up to the IC.   He can count the statements of RCs as
   they make them, either in public (e.g. this echo) or in private (e.g.
   netmail).  He can call for a formal vote.   I don't know how he will
   handle it.

                        dale (at) min (dot) net
                              (1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked on Hesperus in Columbia, Maryland. 01:51:59, 25 Dec 2003
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01