ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-arr-dt]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Draft permanent RT endorsement process

  • To: "Caroline Greer" <cgreer@xxxxxxxxx>, "William Drake" <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Draft permanent RT endorsement process
  • From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 14:35:22 -0400

Thanks Bill for getting this moving and thanks Caroline for your edits.
I added some suggested edits.

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Caroline Greer
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 10:14 AM
> To: William Drake; gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Draft permanent RT endorsement process
> 
> Thanks Bill. I just caught a few small typos - revisions attached.
> 
> We seem to have relaxed the gender diversity requirement? We
previously
> said no more than 2/3 coming from one gender and now we are saying the
> applicants can't all be of the one gender. That change is fine by me
> but I just wondered if I had missed that discussion somewhere along
the
> way.
> 
> 
> Are we expecting the Council to be ready to vote on additional
> candidates if the diversity needs piece kicks in? It strikes me that
> some preparation might need to be done if that need arises as I don't
> know if Councilors would be ready to vote on the call straight away.
> Perhaps we can avoid this difficulty by doing some prep work
beforehand
> to figure out who will end up as being endorsed......or we see how we
> get on and if some folks aren't ready, we do a quick follow up Council
> call?
> 
> Caroline.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of William Drake
> Sent: 25 May 2010 14:22
> To: gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-arr-dt] Draft permanent RT endorsement process
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Sorry, I'm really swamped with other stuff, so the attached was
drafted
> fairly quickly and may need some fine tuning of language.  But we
> needed somewhere to start, and I think it captures the points people
> have raised in moving toward a simplified model; let me know if not.
> 
> Let's tinker and tweak and then get it off to the SGs for buy-in.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bill

Attachment: AoC RTs Process for GNSO Endorsements with Drake and Gomes edits.doc
Description: AoC RTs Process for GNSO Endorsements with Drake and Gomes edits.doc



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy