AW: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform
Avri Doria
avri at psg.com
Tue Nov 27 13:24:19 UTC 2007
Hi,
I tend to agree. E.g. I support the WG proposal completely and
think the proposal allows us the leeway to define them in a way that
works and is flexible. I would, therefore, be uncomfortable with a
statement that indicated that GNSO had consensus in stating that we
feel that we should be wary of WGs. So while I can live with the
statement we have that says they need a lot of thought and we want
flexibility, I become uncomfortable as we had more caveats.
a.
On 27 nov 2007, at 13.14, Thomas Keller wrote:
> Philip,
>
> I guess the problem is that we all agree on WG but to a different
> degree. Which leads me to the conclusion that we are not in
> agreement with the BGC recommendation and that we need further time
> to refine our statement.
>
> 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 10:55
> An: 'Council GNSO'
> Betreff: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform
>
> Tom, Tim
> I certainly have sympathy for trying to be clear on language !
>
> Of course we can strike out the entire section of working groups
> but that seems a pity if we are all close to agreement and just
> need to get the words right.
>
> Forget the wording of the paper for the moment are you saying Tom
> and Tim that:
> a) you support ONLY working groups OR (like the BGC)
> b) you support mostly working groups for big PDPs but want
> flexibility for other types of group OR (Council's current wording)
> c) you want full flexibility for WGS, TFs etc with no special
> preference for one over the other - its best to decide per issue
> (more flexible than Council's current wording).
>
> It would be helpful to know which of these 3 options are yours (or
> if I have missed an option).
>
> Philip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20071127/b9d9b5ee/attachment.html>
More information about the council
mailing list