NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
Non-Commercial User Constituency <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
clarification (was RE: [NCUC-DISCUSS] further comments
From:
Chris Chiu <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:58:22 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Chris Chiu <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines) 
I actually meant something different with my question: are we comfortable with having that second prong there, or should we just argue for that first approach?

Sincerely,
Christopher Chiu
Technology Policy Analyst
American Civil Liberties Union



-----Original Message-----
From: Milton Mueller [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 4:33 PM
To: Chris Chiu; [log in to unmask]
Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] further comments (was RE:
[NCUC-DISCUSS]DraftNCUC comments


The first prong -is- opt-in. :-)

>>> Chris Chiu <[log in to unmask]> 02/17/04 04:10PM >>>
>The first prong of your approach sounds very good. 
>As for the second prong, why don't we just ask for opt-in?

ATOM RSS1 RSS2