Re: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] Updated outstanding issues document + action items

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On 3 Feb 2011, at 11:42, Marika Konings wrote:

>       • Recommendation # 21 -  One WT member also suggested that the 
> recommendation should include that a response needs to be provided to an 
> SO/AC that submits comments. It was agreed to circulate the proposed language 
> on the mailing list to obtain further input on this issue. The proposed 
> language is as follows: “Comments from ACs and SOs should receive a direct 
> response from the WG”. (WG Members are encouraged to provide feedback on this 
> proposed language.)
> 


As the WT member who made this recommendation, it is for me a matter of respect 
for the AC and So that prompts the recommendation..

If an AC or SO goes to the extent of sending a communique or other directed 
comment to the WG, it is sort of dismissive to just treat it as if it were a 
comment in the community comments.

I am recommending a relationship between the GNSO, and its working groups, of 
outreach and respectful response.  I am not recommending that these comment be 
treated as special in that they have greater influence, but rather am 
recommending that there is a respectful way to treat the GNSO's peers.

thanks

a.