AW: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform
Tim Ruiz
tim at godaddy.com
Tue Nov 27 09:23:49 UTC 2007
Just boarding for a 10 hr flight so likely my last opportunity to
comment on this.
I would support Tom's suggestion. Being willing to give WGs a try is not
really support for recommendation. We should be clear about all views on
this.
Tim
Sent from Go Daddy Mobile Mail.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: AW: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform
> From: "Thomas Keller" <tom at 1und1.de>
> Date: Tue, November 27, 2007 3:01 am
> To: "'Philip Sheppard'" <philip.sheppard at aim.be>, "'Council
> GNSO'" <council at gnso.icann.org>
>
>
> Hi Philip,
>
> as I just wrote in my last mail. I do
> not think that we are in unanimous
> agreement of the recommendation
> therefore we should strike it from the
> list.
>
> tom
> ___________________________________
> Von: owner-council at gnso.icann.org
> [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] Im
> Auftrag von Philip Sheppard
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. November 2007
> 09:45
> An: 'Council GNSO'
> Betreff: [council] Draft reply Council
> on GNSO reform
> If I read Council right (thanks Chuck,
> Avri, Adrian),
> I will amend to "qualified support"
> where I previously wrote "partial
> support".
>
> I think we are all on the same page
> here.
> (Chuck we are not advocating task forces
> here just laying down a marker for
> flexibility which I note you support).
>
> Philip
More information about the council
mailing list