[gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: IOC / RC Working Group Progress

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

Thanks Brian.  I would like to ask a question regarding the footnote.  Let me 
first set the context.  Much of the implementation work that has gone on for 
the last few years has resulted in modifications of prior GNSO policy advice 
but I don't believe that the groups that recommended those changes we requested 
to provide explanations for the changes that were made to the guidebook.  If I 
am wrong please correct me.  If not, why is this DT being treated differently?

Please don't misunderstand, I think we can provide explanations and likely 
will, but there seems to be an inconsistency here.

Chuck

From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Brian Peck
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 2:14 PM
To: Kurt Pritz; gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Margie Milam; Amy Stathos
Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Re: IOC / RC Working Group Progress

All:

Our apologies, it was brought to our attention that the document sent out had a 
formatting issue which resulted in a segment of the footnote text being 
deleted.  Please find attached the correct version with the full footnote text. 
 Thank you.

Brian Peck
Policy Director
ICANN


On 3/1/12 10:22 AM, "Kurt Pritz" <kurt.pritz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
All:

Please see the attached document, intended to be helpful in your work on this 
review team as we continue to find the best way forward. (I would have sent as 
an email but didn't want to mess the formatting.

Please contact Margie, Brian or me with questions you might have.

Kurt