Re: MCM - Digest V1 #175

[nfrank@mindspring.com]

I will try to give my impression of the recent PAM discussions.

Mary said... 
    "I think you are making a big mistake in assuming that non-responders favor 
going ahead with PAM at this particular time......and
She said....
He [bob mccaw] proposes:  he will do the incorporation and file for non-profit 
status without a fee.

Then David Lass said:  he would like BobMc to review any draft document.

First, thanks to Bob for offering to help the  AGA. Second, I respect Mary's 
concerns. I also agree that we should figure out a good way of talking on the 
internet. It is not easy.
It is also my understanding that we have not yet been asked to have our 'final' 
vote to go ahead with PAM. If anything, many people have recently thrown up 
some red flags, if not demanding that we put on the breaks. It is my 
understanding, however, that AGA is continuing its PAM discussions with Dave 
Gomberg thru David Lass. (I like Lass's suggestion for legal review. I hope 
BobM will be willing). With DL as our representative, I am sure that the draft 
agreement will not give away the store. I also suspect that Gomberg will be 
flexible.... eventually.... it just takes time to get thru his single minded 
exterior. If I am correct... and DL can in fact produce a PAM agreement which 
is good for the AGA, then the MC and our legal consultant can review it and 
AFTERWARDS we can take the vote that Mary is looking for. Not knowing how long 
this process may take, we should allow for the possiblity that we will need  
TAG for a while longer. On the other hand, let's not rule out the possi!
!
bility that DL will be quick and we can make a decision before the end of the 
year. If we do go with PAM, I suggest that we not call our 4 or more pages TAG 
but instead call it something else (like AGA corner).

--Neil