<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1543" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 4/27/07 9:03:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamboi@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Do we
have any discussion on this? I'm feeling a little uncertain<BR>since I'm
not very clear on what the underlying issues are that make it<BR>necessary for
an 'alternative' agenda and what the pros and cons of it<BR>all
are.<BR><BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Short story: The Agenda Team is a subcommittee of the GPCA
Coordinating Committee.</DIV>
<DIV>It prepared a proposed agenda (not to be confused with Michael Feinstein's
proposed agenda). But the Agenda Team apparently feels compelled to seek
CC approval of its draft before publishing an agenda packet, including the text
of all of the proposals. The CC is deadlocked into inaction on just about
anything and has not even considered the draft agenda. A group of some
Agenda Team members, some CC members, and some SC/WG CoCos (nonexclusive
categories) prepared an alternate agenda which has been informally
circulated. We are requesting affirmations of this just to have a draft
agenda to publish and present as the first order of business at the
plenary. Warner</DIV></FONT><BR><BR><BR><DIV><FONT style="color: black; font: normal 10pt ARIAL, SAN-SERIF;"><HR style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px">See what's free at <A title="http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503" href="http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503" target="_blank">AOL.com</A>. </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>