Re: [Membership] The real reason language is not the issue

[Elliot Nesterman <elliot@inch.com>]

The same can be said of ISOC. Indeed, one supposes that all the internet
SIGs will become members with a history of association, meetings, etc.
Though one can conjecture that the IFWP members may be the most
outspoken.

Eric Weisberg wrote:
> 
> I simply ask why we would want to redo this effort.  Why not try
> something new--build on our history instead of throwing it away?
> Why not use this solid foundation?  Why risk the almost certain
> war which will accompany some new definition of our membership
> when we have a familiar and comfortable association, already?
> What new value would this bring to the table?  What old
> accomplishment might be abandoned?