<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-review-dt] FW: GNSO review
- To: "'avri@xxxxxxx'" <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-review-dt] FW: GNSO review
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:17:40 +0000
The voting isn't complicated to me. The thresholds are.
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 05:41 PM
Cc: gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx <gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>; 'BRG'
<philip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-review-dt] FW: GNSO review
On 12-Jun-14 20:24, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> [Chuck Gomes] As I explained in the history lesson above, registry
> and registrar representative votes counted double.
and they still do, though it is not structural as opposed to count by twos.
that did not change it was just turned into a euphemism. A very
complicated one with voting charts and tables.
avri
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|