Re: [gnso-dow123] Re: Updates

[KathrynKL@xxxxxxx]

In light of Jordyn's absence, I think Ross should do the presentation before 
the GNSO (as they are of the same constituency).  I have not discussed this 
with Ross.

Regards, Kathy


> 
> I think it's hard to express this on a slide intended to be projected
> in front of a big room.  Ross's approach of simply referring to the
> report is an alternative that works in the format.
> 
> Regardless of what's projected, I would imagine that whoever was
> giving the presentation would spend a few moments here to express
> something along the lines of the language we agreed to for the report
> on our last call to discuss the public comments received.  I think
> that represents the situation pretty fairly--I'm just not sure we can
> distill it into a few easy words that are going to be suitable to the
> PowerPoint format.
> 
> Jordyn
> 
> On 3/26/06, KathrynKL@xxxxxxx <KathrynKL@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >Thanks Jordyn for putting this together.  Hope everyone's travels to NZ 
> were
> >uneventful.
> >
> > Jordayn, I see these slides as a continuation of Vancouver, and appreciate
> >the updating you have done.  That said, I strongly object to the line on
> >Slide 8 (Status of Work).  "âRecently concluded public comment period.
> >Received approximately 45 responses; most favored Formulation #2"
> >
> > I think this leave a very incomplete impression.  If we wanted to say that
> >"strong comments were submitted by both sides, with leading organizations
> >weighing in for both formulations."  that would be fine.
> >
> > Or if we wanted to take the following lines line from our Final Report,
> >that would be fine too:
> >     "The comments show a division in the community, with 9 respondents
> >expressing support for Formulation 1 and 33 respondents supporting
> >Formulation 2.  A number of the comments supporting Formulation 2 featured
> >similar argumentation and structure which may be the result of one or more
> >constituencies encouraging participation and responses during the public
> >comment period."
> >
> > It's a long sentence, but it is accurate and already agreed upon and
> >published.
> > (and the issue is worthy of a little extra space and discussion).
> >
> > Thanks, Kathy
> >
> >
> > <<
> >
> >
> > Please find attached my first draft of the slides for the Public Forum.
> >
> > I'm glad to make further edits, or if people in Wellington want to
> > co-ordinate any changes, that's fine as well.
> >
> > We should probably designate someone to give the presentation in
> > Wellington.  Any volunteers?
> >
> > Jordyn
> >
> > On 3/23/06, Jordyn Buchanan <jordyn.buchanan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >Hello all:
> > >
> > >A few updates ahead of Wellington:
> > >
> > >1) I will be sending out a proposed set of slides momentarily.
> > >Depending on how much time we've been allocated, these may be a little
> > >long and need to be edited down.  I'm glad to take comments and
> > >continue to try to work on these on the next few days.  However, we
> > >are going to need to designate someone from the Task Force to present
> > >the slides at the public forum, because...
> > >
> > >2) I will not be in Wellington.  I have recently decided to leave
> > >Register.com, and as a result will not be making the trip to New
> > >Zealand.  We will probably also need to discuss what this means in
> > >terms of the ongoing chairing of the task force.  I do want to make
> > >sure that we don't lose track of our work, though, so I'm more than
> > >willing to continue to help out as we figure out an ongoing
> > >strategy...
> > >
> > >Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.
> > >
> > >Jordyn
> > >
>