<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; font-size:10pt;"><div>More explicitly, what I'm asking each SG to do during their deliberations/voting on this is to note all the candidates that have at least some support from their SG so the option below can be considered by the Council. <BR></div>
<div><BR></div>
<div>Tim </div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 8px; FONT-FAMILY: verdana; COLOR: black; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=replyBlockquote webmail="1">
<DIV id=wmQuoteWrapper>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: AoC Reveiw Team Re-do...<BR>From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@godaddy.com><BR>Date: Mon, March 08, 2010 1:36 pm<BR>To: "GNSO Council " <council@gnso.icann.org><BR><BR>Given what Janis and Peter said during the AoC Q&A this morning<BR>including the fact that the review team will be larger than first<BR>proposed, we should re-think our endorsement process and only be<BR>considering who if any of the twelve we do not endorse and submit the<BR>rest.<BR><BR>I think this should be kept simple. If any of the candidates have<BR>endorsement of at least one SG they are included. The names would be<BR>submitted showing the SG(s) endorsement. This only slightly changes what<BR>the SG are required to do (reverses it), and resolves the gender and<BR>geographic issues since it leaves it to Janis and Peter to sort out.<BR><BR>This also gives the most number of candidates an opportunity to be<BR>considered and give the GNSO the best shot at being fully represented on<BR>the RT.<BR><BR><BR>Tim <BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></span></body></html>