Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] CONSENSUS POLL OPEN -- please complete it before our call on Thursday
- To: Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] CONSENSUS POLL OPEN -- please complete it before our call on Thursday
- From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 10:11:27 -0500
thanks for the acknowledgement of my awesomeness. :-)
i've touched, and i hope fixed, all but the last point in your list Jeff. take
a look and see how i did. i await the will of the group on point 5.
here's a new link to preview the poll without having to actually take it. it
obsoletes the one below, which points to the old version.
On Jul 14, 2010, at 12:04 AM, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:
> A couple of quick comments on the poll:
> 1- Awesome job putting this together. It looks great
> 2 - The opening line of the BRU1 statement begins "There was strong
> consensus................" This is misleading as there was strong consensus
> of the RACK group that wrote BRU1. None of the other proposals state this and
> ask this be corrected immediately as it is misleading
> 3 - Question 21 asks in addition to 2. Are these questions linked? It seems
> they are.
> 4 - Why are we expressing minority opinions in Question 34? If Kathy Kleinman
> is opposed to Question 34 she can answer opposed. The other groups may have
> had consensus but I did not hear unanimous consent from other groups. They
> did not list all dissenting opinions from each member
> 5 - I thought that BRU2 allowed self distribution up to the de-minimus amount
> , 2% or 5%. may need some help from others in group on this
> Jeff Eckhaus
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of Mike O'Connor [mike@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 6:40 PM
> To: Jon Nevett
> 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.
> On Jul 13, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Jon Nevett wrote:
>> 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.
>> 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
>>> here's the link to the 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...
>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>> 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.)
> Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may include
> privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Demand Media,
> Inc. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the
> intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are
> not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this
> message and then delete it from your system. Thank you.
- - - - - - - - -
handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)