At 19:03 30/07/97 +1000, David Keegel wrote:
>I think a fundamental question is whether ADNA (as the entity selecting
>DNAs) wants to exercise some discretion at selection time, or whether
>the process should be deterministic, so that a firm of accountants (for
>example) can decide whether or not an application should succeed.

This was my original approach - to make the criteria so specific that the
applicant virtually knew whether they would be successful before the
application went in. Since then, however, there have been several people
arguing to make the criteria less stringent and more vague and this is
leaving us at the point where no final version of the criteria can be
submitted that more than about 50% of the contributors agree on.

I'm not sure what can be done to reach a decision on these matters. Even if
I tried calling a vote, it would be pretty hard to narrow the debate down
to a couple of distinct options. It might be another case of just setting
out the opposing views and having the final decision made by the ADNA
board. Obviously it would be better to have a final version come out of the
public consultancy stage.

Regards

--
Kevin Dinn ____________________    o    _          _--_|\    ZIP P/L 
Business Manager              /____|___|_)________/______\_____________
www.zip.com.au                         | .        \_.--._/  Virtually
Phone: (Australia) 02 92 704 777  Fax: 92 475 276       v  the best :-)
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
(soon to be ex) President - Australian Internet Alliance (www.aia.asn.au)
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...