Re: [gnso-policyimpl-dt] For final review - proposed WG Charter

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

agree. 

Sent from my phone (651-647-6109). Please forgive the goofy transliterations it 
does to my terrible typing. 

On Jul 2, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> +1
> 
> On Jul 2, 2013, at 9:00 AM, "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Based on the list discussion I have seen, I don’t think we need a call 
>> tomorrow.  I for one am willing to give Holly the discretion to review all 
>> the discussion and make a chair decision on how to handle any remaining 
>> differences of opinion.
>>  
>> Chuck
>>  
>> From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Holly Raiche
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 2:51 AM
>> To: gnso-policyimpl-dt@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: Marika Konings
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-policyimpl-dt] For final review - proposed WG Charter
>>  
>> Folks
>> 
>> If there is one thing I do NOT want to do, it is have another 5.00am meeting 
>> in two days time (particularly since I have a 1.00am call that morning!)
>> 
>> SOOooo
>> 
>> From what I have gathered from the emails, there are really only two changes 
>> to the charter that Marika sent out (and thank you Marika for the very quick 
>> turn around)
>> 
>> The first is really wording - first spotted by Eduardo and then cleaned up a 
>> bit
>> 
>> The other was question 4 - and from the emails, I think people are happy to 
>> go with ChucK's rewording of it.
>> 
>> I have incorporated those changes only into a clean copy - and what I want 
>> from everyone is either confirmation that this is what can go forward, or 
>> not (and if not, please, what do you want changed - with proposed wording - 
>> and why)  Otherwise, if I don't hear from you, this is what we proceed with
>> 
>> And thank you one and all for your time, diligence and patience
>> 
>> Holly