Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] SIC Feedback to Questions raised by the Drafting Team on Bylaws Changes

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Raimundo,

This really is helpful feedback. It helps put an end to several discussions
we've been having.

I note that the names of Houses and SGs should not be changed. So we will
have the Users & Providers House and the Contracted Parties & Suppliers
House, under which we will have the Registries SG, Registrar SG, Commercial
SG and Non-Commercial SG, with constituencies following.

However, if that is the case, I am puzzled by the SIC's advice that "the
usage of names like Suppliers, Providers and Indiduals should be avoided"
but that the names should not be changed, since both suppliers and providers
are terms used in the names being proposed for the SGs.

Stéphane


Le 08/06/09 02:59, « rbeca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx » <rbeca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a
écrit :

> 
> Dear All:
> 
> As promised, I'm ataching you a set of Feedbacks from the SIC to the 10
> Questions raised by the Drafting Team to he Board. Let me recall that the
> Board authorized the SIC to provide these Feedbacks. However, the SIC
> opinion is only a recommedation to the Board, which it is not bind to follow.
> 
> For sure, I would have liked to provide these Feedbacks quite before.
> However, it was not possible.
> 
> Of course, feel free to raise any question at this respect.
> 
> Regards, Raimundo
> --
> Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)
>