Re: [gnso-dt-wg] proposed motions
Mike, several comments.1. I note that the new version says that a Applicable gTLD operator "may not offer any refund" instead of "may not offer a full refund". I support this change.
2. At the end of 1.b. you have "...which reoccur regularly will not be deemed extraordinary." It should be "...which reoccur regularly will be deemed to not be extraordinary."
3. In the second line of 2, what is the meaning of the Y in square brackets? It was in Jeff's version as well, but I assumed it was a typo.
4. Item 3 does not seem to be appropriate as one of the recommendations to the Board. I would remove its number and simply make it a text paragraph following the second (and last) recommendation to the Board. (And there is an extraneous blank at the start of the current 3.b.)
Alan At 26/02/2008 08:12 PM, you wrote:
Hi all, Thanks for the productive call today. As discussed, attached please find the revised draft motion that we propose to put out for public comment for 21 days as of March 7th. This is a clean version and I made some edits that I believe were insubstantial, in addition to those we discussed today. Please review and lmk your thoughts. Once I have the timing info and other piece of language from Liz, I will circulate a proposed motion for our March 6 Council meeting. Avri and Chuck, please ensure that we have time on our agenda to discuss that motion. Kind regards, Mike Rodenbaugh