RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details / Monday 03 August 1900 UTC

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

They were proposed as and intended to be separate efforts.

The only way they are related is that both resolutions were included in
the same motion and both were agreed to in order to garner/give support
for the existing RAA amendments.

Tim

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details /
Monday 03 August 1900 UTC
From: "Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, August 03, 2009 11:45 am
To: <gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx>


Why should they be separated, and how are they NOT related?

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
On
Behalf Of Trachtenberg, Marc H.
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 9:32 AM
To: Tim Ruiz; Avri Doria
Cc: gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details /
Monday 03
August 1900 UTC



I agree that they should be separated.

Best regards,


Marc H. Trachtenberg
35 W. Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60601-9703
D: +1 (312) 558-7964
M: +1 (773) 677-3305 
F: +1 (312) 558-5700
http://www.winston.com


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
On
Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 11:28 AM
To: Avri Doria
Cc: gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details /
Monday 03
August 1900 UTC


Not sure that we even need a Chair for either of these efforts. And they
will not work well unless separated. They are NOT related, it was not
discussed as if they were, and the RrC never agreed that they were a
combined effort. That's why there were two resolutions.

Tim

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details /
Monday 03
August 1900 UTC
From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, August 03, 2009 11:06 am
To: gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx



On 3 Aug 2009, at 11:39, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:

>
> I will volunteer as chair or co-chair, if there are no other 
> volunteers from the BC, IPC or ISPCPC leadership. I believe it is 
> important that people from non-contracting parties take leadership 
> roles in this group.


Thanks for this.

My personal suggestion would be for someone who was neither on ALAC nor
the
GNSO Council to chair - as part of the effort to spread the work beyond
official councils, i.e as part of the new council as policy manager
effort

I also think we should appoint someone to act as a GNSO council
liaison(s) to the group. You are already doing several of these, but we
can
discuss that in the next council meeting.

As for non-contracting parties versus contracting parties, one idea may
be
to have 2 co-chairs, with one from each house.

Thanks
a.





The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential.
Therefore,
if this message has been received in error, please delete it without
reading
it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable
privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission
of
the author.
****************************************************************************
**
Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and
cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under
the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.