<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [bc-gnso] Seoul draft agendas
- To: BC gnso <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Seoul draft agendas
- From: George Kirikos <icann@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 08:17:39 -0400
Hello,
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Philip Sheppard wrote:
> Any comments, additions or deletions are welcome on the list or latest our
> call next week.
> 2. R&R separation and other competitive issues - do we have a joint view?
Maintenance of price caps to protect registrants should be added to the list.
> 2. How to address the fact that larger BC members are not contributing to an
> archived e-mail list
I would suggest deletion of an attempt to reverse our past vote
regarding the public archived mailing list. The IETF, for example, has
public mailing lists, too, e.g. at:
http://www.ietf.org/ibin/c5i?mid=6&rid=48&gid=0&k1=933
and I see posts in their archives from:
Cisco ($134 billion market cap), SAP ($58 billion market cap), Nokia
($54 billion market cap), Sun Microsystems ($7 billion market cap,
although they are about to be acquired by even bigger Oracle),
Ericsson ($32 billion market cap), AT&T ($160 billion market cap), and
Qualcomm ($75 billion market cap) amongst others, just in the past 2
weeks.
If the agenda item is modified to read as:
"How to address the fact that larger BC members are not contributing
to the BC's workload"
with reference to the issues and representation at:
http://www.bizconst.org/responsibilities.htm
where many of the roles are filled by representatives of the smaller
companies, that might be a better place to begin.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|