Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] CONSENSUS POLL OPEN -- SRSU

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

i agree with Tim's comment.

I think the level of support for SRSU depends on the expansiveness of the 
definition.  

In my opinion, there's more support for it with a limited definition --  i.e.  
one that is more BRU1 than IPC.

If possible, it would be good to measure support for SRSU with the BRU1 
definition and support with the IPC definition ---   but I'm mindful of making 
the poll too complex.

I'm happy for the Chairs to make a call on doing that.

RT


With a limited definition 
On Jul 13, 2010, at 8:01 PM, tim@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> 
> The SRSU exception (on 22 I think) is ambiguous because there has been no 
> agreement on the details or definition. So the report should make that clear.
> 
> Tim
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sender: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:40:05 
> To: Jon Nevett<jon@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] CONSENSUS POLL OPEN -- please complete it before 
> our call on Thursday
> 
> 
> hi Jon,
> 
> egad...  what a good idea.
> 
> here's a link to a "preview" of the poll -- it looks just like the poll, 
> except it doesn't collect results.  the only trick is, you have to put 
> *something* in the required "name" question to get to the next page.  my 
> favorite answer is usually "sdsdsd"...  your choice.
> 
>       http://bit.ly/afCGve
> 
> m
> 
> 
> On Jul 13, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Jon Nevett wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Mikey:
>> 
>> Thanks for your hard work on this.  Would you publish the poll questions for 
>> review in an e-mail . . . just in case something got lost in the translation 
>> in one of the questions.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> Jon
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 13, 2010, at 8:28 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> hi all,
>>> 
>>> thanks for all your hard work on various proposals, atoms, etc.  
>>> 
>>> i've spent the afternoon cutting and pasting and have a (pretty long) poll 
>>> put together for you.  i found that i reviewed your work pretty carefully 
>>> and learned a lot as i put the poll together.  i'm hoping it will prompt 
>>> you to look through your collective work with "fresh eyes" as you complete 
>>> it.
>>> 
>>> here's the link to the poll
>>> 
>>>     http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/Initial-report-poll
>>> 
>>> PLEASE try to complete it by 3 hours before our call on Thursday to give me 
>>> a bit of time to scratch together a preliminary summary.
>>> 
>>> note -- i didn't get updated versions of the SRSU or Compliance writeups, 
>>> so they're cobbled together from the drafts we had for the Monday call.  
>>> try to imagine where we might take them as we continue to refine these 
>>> drafts over the next few weeks (while the public comment period is open) 
>>> when expressing your support...
>>> 
>>> thanks,
>>> 
>>> mikey
>>> 
>>> 
>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>> phone       651-647-6109  
>>> fax                 866-280-2356  
>>> web         http://www.haven2.com
>>> handle      OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, 
>>> Google, etc.)
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone         651-647-6109  
> fax           866-280-2356  
> web   http://www.haven2.com
> handle        OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, 
> Google, etc.)
> 
> 
>