<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report
- To: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:41:20 +0000
Thanks Stephanie. Your edits look fine to me, noting that 'commited' has two
t's: 'committed'.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Stephanie Perrin [stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 6:33 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft Statement on
Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report
I think this is very sensible. I offer only a few typo edits and one
additional sentence in the attached markup version
Thanks!
Stephanie Perrin
On 2015-09-17 19:18, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I took a first crack at possible Working Party comments on Westlake's
Recommendation 23 that we discussed in most of our meeting yesterday. I have
to confess that I am not real satisfied with my draft but I hope that it will
facilitate our efforts to create one even if we ignore mine and start from
scratch.
If we do develop comments, I think that it would be important for us to try to
get unanimous approval by Working Team members who participate in writing and
approving the comments or, if we cannot do that, at least provide an
opportunity for minority statements.
Open and free criticism is welcome including from those in the NPOC like Klaus.
Chuck
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|