[Internal-cg] Note to CWG re timeline?
kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Thu Jan 15 08:46:03 UTC 2015
I strongly disagree to the use of the term " Conditional Accountability"
that is a totally misleading, vague , ambiguous and unacceptable term
Either we have the terms and scope of accountability or we do not have .
PLEASE AVOID TO INJECT AND PROPOGATE WRONG TERMS
2015-01-15 7:47 GMT+01:00 Joseph Alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com>:
> No objections
> Sent from my iPad
> > On Jan 14, 2015, at 5:21 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in> wrote:
> > Wolf-Ulrich suggested on the call today that we send a note to the CWG
> to obtain more information about their expected timeline if it does indeed
> slip. I’m happy to send such a note if people agree. I’ve drafted something
> up below.
> > What do others think? Should we send a note? What do you think of the
> text below?
> > Alissa
> > ----
> > Dear CWG,
> > The ICG has been following the developments in all of the operational
> communities, including the naming community. We have noted some discussions
> about the possibility that the CWG might require additional time to
> complete its response to the ICG RFP beyond its original planned submission
> date of January 30, 2015. We would ask that if you decide to revise your
> estimated completion date that you share with the ICG your revised expected
> > Thank you,
> > Alissa Cooper on behalf of the ICG
> > _______________________________________________
> > Internal-cg mailing list
> > Internal-cg at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg