[CCWG-ACCT] Timing and agenda Thursday's call and options to be discussed?

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

There has been no prior compromise about the 2/3 rejection
threshold.

el

On 2016-02-04 08:27, Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch wrote:
> Dear James
> 
> I understand your point.
> 
> However, rec11 has been reopened at the gnso's behest in the ccwg.
> 
> I guess that GAC colleagues would need to know what exactly is
> needed/suggested by the part of the community (gnso) who is trying
> to change a prior compromise which directly affects our part (gac).
> 
> Without that a meaningful debate is quite difficult, especially when
> you are talking about govts and a large group of them working on a
> full consensus rule.
> 
> best Jorge
> 
> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> 
>> Am 04.02.2016 um 07:20 schrieb James Gannon
>> <james at cyberinvasion.net>:
>>
>> I obviously do not speak for the GNSO but I think that the
>> Becky/Kavouss discussions are gaining much traction and may be
>> acceptable to the GNSO. But like yourself we are in the situation
>> of having to consult with our own very diverse stakeholders and
>> constituents, so if it feels like the GNSO has not agreed a
>> position that you can take to yours its because of exactly the same
>> reason, we cannot come out in support of a single proposal until
>> have confirmed that it is understood and accepted by our own
>> memberships.  And given that some constituencies are very large
>> (Not just my own) that can take a few days to confirm.
>>
>> -James
[...]
-- 
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
el at lisse.NA            / *     |   Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421             \     /
Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/