<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report
- To: Jen Wolfe <jwolfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:42:37 +0000
Amr's edits look fine to me.
Jen - I fully support you adding your comments about the other recommendations
and also restructuring as you think best.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Jen Wolfe
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:49 AM
To: gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Amr Elsadr
Subject: FW: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft
Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report
I am forwarding the revised document from Amr. Thanks, Amr for taking the
first pass at making revisions noted. If you plan to make edits, please send a
quick note around so we can track version control.
I would like to add my suggestion that we include either in the opening,
conclusion or both that there are 35 other recommendations, many of which there
is wide spread consensus for support, based upon public comments, and that we,
as the Working Party will be meeting to discuss recommendations on
implementation. Please let me know if that continues to be acceptable to
everyone.
We still need to restructure the numbering as well, per our discussion. I'm
happy to do that. Please let me know, though, if anyone else wants to make
substantive changes and I'll wait to make the structure changes and incorporate
my above comment. We are targeting delivering this to GNSO Council by
Thursday, prior to the council meeting.
If anyone from the BC or IPC can offer comments, that would be greatly helpful.
There was no one on the last two calls and just want to make sure you do not
object to this communication.
Thanks so much for your continued support and commitment to this process!
Jen
JENNIFER C. WOLFE, ESQ., APR, SSBB
FOUNDER & PRESIDENT, WOLFE DOMAIN, A DIGITAL BRAND STRATEGY ADVISORY FIRM
513.746.2800 X 1 OR CELL 513.238.4348
IAM 300 - TOP 300 GLOBAL IP STRATEGISTS 2011-2014 What will you do with your
Dot Brand? : http://ow.ly/Ebl8P Subscribe to Our You Tube Channel on Brand
gTLDs http://ow.ly/Eblgc Jen Wolfe gTLD Click Z Column http://ow.ly/EbljP
Linked In Group: gTLD Strategy for Brands http://ow.ly/EbloM
-----Original Message-----
From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:57 PM
To: Jen Wolfe <jwolfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft
Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report
Hi,
I’ve attached a document to this email with the changes I suggested during
today’s call, along with a couple more. As suggested by Chuck, I used a clean
copy of the document following the edits provided by Bill, then made redline
changes to that so that all changes following today’s call are clearly visible.
Could you please forward this to the working party list for consideration?
Thanks Jen.
Amr
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|