RE: [gnso-consensus-wg] More Updated Draft

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My understanding is that there would be three NomCom reps, one for each
house and a nonvoting appointee at the Council level.  Am I wrong?  If
not, then are you saying Avri that you cannot support that?

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 11:12 AM
> To: gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-consensus-wg] More Updated Draft
> 
> 
> i will not be able to support a consensus decision that has 
> only 2 nomcom reps.
> no leeway on that today, just as there wasn't yesterday.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>
> >> Bc can support most of below wih exception of GNSO chair.
> >>
> >> The concept of default chair in case of disagreement is not needed.
> >> Nom com shold serve council not the other way around.
> >> We can only support GNSO chair elected from within GNSO.
> >> (That may as today include the two nom com reps) Philip
> >>
> >
> >
> 
>