<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Why did the dissenting views on 5A get moved to a footnote? They were in the body of the text of the report in the versions of this document before. Had they been in a footnote before I would have objected. I don't believe it is appropriate to make such a significant change prejudicing minority views after the document is supposedly locked. We were told the document was locked, and yet this change was made with no opportunity to object. Therefore I object now and request the text get moved back to the body of the report as it was in all the previous drafts we reviewed.<div><br></div><div>Thank you,</div><div>Robin<br><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Aug 1, 2015, at 5:53 PM, Grace Abuhamad wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><div>Dear all, </div><div><br></div><div>Here is the updated community mechanism document for the freeze. This includes the dissenting opinions text that Robin and Greg clarified. </div><div><br></div><div>Best, </div><div>Grace</div></div>
<span><Community Mechanism_0108.docx></span><span><Community Mechanism_0108_redline.docx></span><span><Community Mechanism_0108_redline.pdf></span><span><Community Mechanism_0108.pdf></span>_______________________________________________<br>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>