<!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 6.00.2900.3199" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; webkit-nbsp-mode: space; webkit-line-break: after-white-space">
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=062584508-27112007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>I have to disagree, as a non native this kind of language
is, sorry for my openenss, confusing the heck out of me. I'd rather paint it
black or white for clarity sake. In my mind there just is no such thing as
unanimous support for parts of a recommendation. We either agree with it or not.
In the case of working groups it is very clear that we do not agree. So
why don't we just strike it from the list of agreed</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=062584508-27112007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>recommendations?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=062584508-27112007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=062584508-27112007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>tom</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=de dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>Von:</B> owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] <B>Im Auftrag von </B>Avri
Doria<BR><B>Gesendet:</B> Montag, 26. November 2007 21:26<BR><B>An:</B> Council
GNSO<BR><B>Betreff:</B> Re: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO
reform<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>hi,</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>seems simpler and more
understandable.
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>while my tortured sense of logic was fine with the other, i see why this is
more understandable especially since we then go and give our qualification.
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>thanks<BR>
<DIV><BR class=webkit-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>a.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>On 26 nov 2007, at 20.35, Gomes, Chuck wrote:</DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 10px Arial; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; orphans: 2; widows: 2; webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; webkit-text-stroke-width: 0">So
we are sayiing "we unanimously partially support the recommendation"? Sounds a
little confusing to me. At the same time, note that in my response to Philip
just sent a couple minutes ago, I suggested "Qualified Support". I think it
may be an improvement to say "we unanimously support a recommendation with
qualifications".</SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>