<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-consensus-wg] User/Non-Contracted Party vs Registrant
- To: "Milton L Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-consensus-wg] User/Non-Contracted Party vs Registrant
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:57:22 +0200
hi,
As i said, i am not on board with a proposal for only 2 nomcom
appointees. and i am not sure how we will react to the addition of a
homeless non voting nomcom appointee without a role - body count is
one thing, but having a fully participatory voice is another. the
requirement for full participation as required by the by-laws may be
met in several ways, but i am afraid i just do not see it happening as
things stand now.
We were still considering it until Phillip's statement showed up.
a.
On 25 Jul 2008, at 17:49, Milton L Mueller wrote:
Good to know you're on Board with the consensus statement, Avri.
Presumably Alan is, too? So, can we add a principle on the
user/registrant distinction in the short time remaining to us?
-----Original Message-----
Gee, i thought people were still trying to reach consensus.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|