<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-consensus-wg] out of scope PDP
- To: gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [gnso-consensus-wg] out of scope PDP
- From: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:44:15 +0200 (CEST)
Chuck, please find a propoal that does not conflcit with the no veto
principle (removals excepted) and you will have support. Why not the same
as our new supermajority rule ?
Philip
> Thanks Jon. I would like to see responses to my suggestion for
> initiating an out-of-scope PDP.
>
> Chuck
>
> On 4c, it seems that we are lowering the threshold of initiating
> an out-of-scope PDP. Why would we do that? A legitimate question from
> the RyC is why we would ever even consider initiating a PDP that is out
> of scope so it would be our ideal position that we never do it. But
> recognizing that others may not accept that and being aware of the very
> late hour in our process, I would suggest that we make this threshold
> 2/3 of both houses. Is there any opposition to that?
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|