[Internal-cg] Rép: Re: Naming the group was RE: scheduling meetings
jjs at dyalog.net
Mon Jul 14 18:47:22 UTC 2014
having just been nominated by the ALAC to the Coordination Grpup, I was late boarding the train on "naming the group".
Your advice is to settle for CG "and not spend more time on this". But I want to take up your remark that "TFSI refer(s) to what we are supposed to facilitate, not to the group itself".
I see this as an advantage: we would thus designate our target, rather than contemplate our navel.
Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> a écrit :
>I think we're all getting way too cute with this.
>CG is fine. The list is already named that. Both TSIF and NXER refer to what we are supposed to facilitate but not to the group itself.
>Most everyone aware of us knows the context of the CG, so CG will do.
>Generally, I believe this is not something we should spend a lot more time on
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-
>> bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jari Arkko
>> Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 8:23 AM
>> To: Narelle Clark
>> Cc: internal-cg at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Naming the group was RE: scheduling meetings
>> > Something witty and catchy would be good - NXFER anyone?
>> I agree. That is pretty good.
>> I also liked TSIF.
>Internal-cg mailing list
>Internal-cg at icann.org
More information about the Internal-cg