ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

[gnso-trans-wg] FW: Transfers prioritization - a very small question...

  • To: "gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-trans-wg] FW: Transfers prioritization - a very small question...
  • From: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:02:30 -0700

Hi all,
Regarding the "CT" issue, I just got confirmation from a most authoritative 
source - Ross himself - that this is a typo, see below.
Accordingly, let's skip CT and use Consensus Ranking whenever we need to, in 
order to stay consistent with the prio group's vocabulary.

Best regards


-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Rader [mailto:ross@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: den 12 mars 2008 18:54
To: Olof Nordling
Subject: Re: Transfers prioritization - a very small question...

Hi Olof -

I would guess that this is a typo that may have crept in somewhere.
The group I worked with only discussed the "consensus rankings" - I
don't have any recollection of anything that looked like "CT".

Hope this helps!


On Mar 12, 2008, at 1:43 PM, Olof Nordling wrote:

> Hi Ross,
> A small group of volunteers is currently finalizing the work of
> suggesting groupings of the "remaining" transfers issues, based on
> your groups priority settings. In that work, we reference your
> Consensus Rankings of the individual issues, but somehow they have
> seeped into our document as, for example, CT 6.0, where I wonder
> whether "CT" is just a misprint for "CR" or has some other
> significance. I suppose the former, as I cannot find "CT" in your
> earlier documents, but I would appreciate your confirmation or
> comments on that.
> Thanks
> Olof

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy