ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [gnso-sti] RE: Draft STI Report - V3 for your review

  • To: "'GNSO STI'" <gnso-sti@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-sti] RE: Draft STI Report - V3 for your review
  • From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 20:47:30 -0500

Well those words were actually mine, so I do support them, but I note that my preference was to delete all of the minority opinions in the right column as including some but not others gives them a level of relative importance that I do not think is appropriate. In the case of At-Large, we will not have an approved minority report for several days, and I would like to think they will not be treated as second-class comments because of their placement.

Your comment about making it more difficult to focus on the substance of the report is also true.


At 08/12/2009 08:21 PM, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:
I think you had it right when you wrote the following statement "Those minority opinions that were know at the time this Report was written are included. Others may be appended by Stakeholder Groups prior to the vote of the GNSO Council"

Would like to hear some feedback on these thoughts

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy