[Wp4] Discrete issue: Which bylaws formulation

[Paul Rosenzweig]

Can someone please point me to the latest version -- I can't seem to find it
...

Regards
Paul

Paul Rosenzweig
Paul.rosenzweig at gmail.com
+1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 
Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
Costa Rica: +506 7008 3964
Our travel blog: www.paulandkatyexcellentadventure.blogspot.com
My professional blog: www.paulrosenzweigesq.com
Link to my PGP Key


-----Original Message-----
From: wp4-bounces at icann.org [mailto:wp4-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Nigel Roberts
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 7:37 AM
To: el at lisse.NA; wp4 at icann.org
Cc: directors at omadhina.net
Subject: Re: [Wp4] Discrete issue: Which bylaws formulation

Eberhard is misdirecting himself. We don't want to look at THAT subset.

We should be looking at (in set theoretical terms) the relative complement
subset.



N.




On 12/10/15 12:27, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
> Paul,
>
> I was not going to die in a ditch about the Ruggie principles, but why
> don't we look at your subset?
>
> el
>
> On 2015-10-11 23:03, Paul Twomey wrote:
>> Nigel
>>
>> I am of a similar view as Tatiana's below.
>>
>> My stated concern has always been with some subset sections of the
>> Ruggie principles.  Not necessarily with UDHR.
>>
>> Paul
> [...]
>
_______________________________________________
Wp4 mailing list
Wp4 at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4