<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] SIC Feedback to Questions raised by the Drafting Team on Bylaws Changes
- To: Gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] SIC Feedback to Questions raised by the Drafting Team on Bylaws Changes
- From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 11:17:19 -0300
Hi,
unfortunately I must leave the call now to attend other meetings.
I am not sure if it was discussed before but in relation with the regional
diversity I support the text drafted by Milton, Chuck and myself.
Regards
Olga
2009/6/8 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Please disregard my previous comment, it seems I was reading from a
> previous
> document as I see in the latest draft that the houses are now called
> "Contracted Parties" and Non-Contracted Parties".
>
> Stéphane
>
>
> Le 08/06/09 15:24, « Stéphane Van Gelder » <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
> a
> écrit :
>
> > 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)
> >>
>
>
>
>
--
Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing.
www.south-ssig.com.ar
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|