RE: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] WG member comments

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree, this is a good point Paul.  I was troubled by many mentions in the
Initial Report of "all" the representatives of Registrars, RyC and NCUC
expressing a view, when that is not necessarily true.

Thanks,
Mike R.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Diaz, Paul
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 9:48 AM
To: gnso-ff-pdp-May08@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] WG member comments


As we continue to address the fast-flux issue, it's probably worth
reiterating that any comments made here are only the views of the
Working Group member.  They should not automatically be interpreted as
the position(s) of the respective constituency.  Unlike an ICANN Task
Force where participants are elected to represent their constituency,
members of a WG are all volunteers and are not automatically empowered
to speak on their constituency's behalf.  Of course, any deliberate
constituency statement should be duly noted.