[Nanog-futures] New Membership-WG Draft
wessels at packet-pushers.com
Wed Oct 27 21:51:17 UTC 2010
On Oct 27, 2010, at 1:39 PM, kris foster wrote:
> I see things like this as a fail safe, and not a requirement that the board consider each individual individually.
I agree with Kris. While I wish that we could simply say that there are
no formal qualifications for membership, I think the language is necessary
to (1) define membership for legal reasons and (2) as a way for the
organization to protect itself from potential outside influences should
that ever be necessary.
From a practical standpoint I think anyone who wants to become a member
will, in all likelihood, be granted membership.
(speaking only for myself)
More information about the Nanog-futures