RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] call for agenda items

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mikey,

I have two concerns/questions. First, will you be getting an updated
table to the WG before the Monday call? By Sunday at the latest? The
more in advance we get it, the better our time will be utilized on the
call. Second, the report. We need to have it to the Council by the 13th
or it may not make the Council agenda for Brussels. That gives us nine
days to pull it together including vetting with the WG.

My personal opinion is that we should focus on the table (because it
will be an integral part of the report), and on the report itself. The
harms can be included in the report as a work in progress. But we should
not be spending any more time on calls on "meta-discussions" prior to
having our report ducks in a row for Brussels.


Tim 
 
 
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] call for agenda items
From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, June 04, 2010 10:03 am
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx


as we work our way toward Brussels, i'm always looking for ways that our
phone calls can be used to advance your work. here's my list of agenda
items so far, but feel free to add things that you think would help move
things along.

-- review the updated proposal-comparison table (note to proposal
advocates, please send me your updates today)

-- review the early-draft table of Harms (i'm working on that now)

-- continue the "meta-discussion" that Avri kicked off on the list today
-- trying to find a way to bridge the divide

thanks,

mikey


- - - - - - - - -
phone 651-647-6109 
fax 866-280-2356 
web www.haven2.com
handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google,
etc.)