Re: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] Final Charter

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

I read the question as being in relation to the statement "it COULD 
be beneficial" - is it rally beneficial or not?
The previous bullet on response consistency is phrased the same way - 
no question mark but an implied question by not saying it WOULD be beneficial.
Perhaps not the clearest possible formulation, but I don't see is as 
obfuscation either, so I can live with it.
Alan

At 09/10/2012 09:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Apologies for missing the meeting - just read the email now about 
> the meeting (wish we have a importable calendar of all WG and DT 
> meetings like AT-Large does).
> In an case, read the final proposal and I have a question.  If it is 
> too late for them in this DT, then I will ask a NCSG g-council member to ask.
> In the second bullet of the Mission, "-stability':  is there a 
> question in that?  It seems rather declarative and I was wondering 
> if it contained any element of a work item or is it just a 
> declaration of 'fact'
> Otherwise it seems fine.
>
> avri
>
>
>
> On 8 Oct 2012, at 15:08, Marika Konings wrote:
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > For your information, please find attached the final version of 
> the proposed charter which will be submitted to the GNSO Council as 
> per the DT's meeting today.
> >
> > With best regards,
> >
> > Marika
> > <Thick Whois Charter - Final - 8 October 2012.doc>