[Internal-cg] Charter comments summary
Alissa Cooper
alissa at cooperw.in
Fri Aug 22 00:15:00 UTC 2014
I agree with Joe that “review” is better than “assess.” Otherwise I think
the charter is ready to go.
Thanks,
Alissa
On 8/19/14, 7:05 AM, "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com> wrote:
>
> This seems fine, just want to make sure that "assess" does not imply the need
> to respond to each point on why its taken on board or not. Would "review"
> achieve the same end with less potential to misread?
>
>
>
> On 8/19/2014 9:35 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>
>
>>
>> This is a new version based on comments that I received during the call. The
>> changes from the version that I posted before the call are:
>>
>> - add the word “independent” in front of the accountability requirement per
>> James’ request
>> - change “Internet community” to “global multi-stakeholder community” per
>> Russ’ off-line request that supported Richard Hill’s original comment
>> - add the requirement for the ICG to compile and assess also the input
>> received beyond the operational communities
>>
>> Change bars are included.
>>
>> As discussed on the call, this is the version that we plan to go ahead with.
>> If you have an issue with this version, please notify the ICG of this within
>> the next week, i.e., before end of business on Tuesday, August 26th.
>>
>> Jari Arkko
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140821/8f11c971/attachment.html>
More information about the Internal-cg
mailing list