RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] "Rules" for proposal-summaries and Principles-summaries

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Can you please let us know which drafting teams there are?  I am confused and I 
don't know which one of them I am on (if any).....although I would like to 
contribute.

Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy


The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 12:14 PM
To: Richard Tindal
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] "Rules" for proposal-summaries and Principles-summaries


i'm going to hijack this thread, since Richard's already kicked it off.  :-)

we agreed on the call today that it would be very useful to have short 
summaries of each of the proposals and each of the Principles for the body of 
the report.  we diverged a bit on what those should look like and wanted to 
take the conversation to the list for resolution.

here are the parameters of the debate;

-- how long -- a certain number of words?  if so, how many -- 200?

-- should those summaries describe levels of support, or leave that out?  
that's the point that Richard raised with his email

-- anything else we should state in advance as guidance to summary-drafters?

let's try to hammer this one out fairly quickly so drafting-teams can get 
started with their summarizing.

hope you don't mind me hijacking your thread Richard,

mikey


On Jul 16, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Richard Tindal wrote:

> 
> Wanted to amplify the point i made on the call today
> 
> Executive summaries can be very powerful things as many will just read that 
> portion of the document.  
> 
> Given this,  I don't think the summaries we provide for each of our proposals 
> should include any words about the level of support or endorsement for our 
> proposals.  
> 
> Kristina - I understand the response you made to this, but i just don't think 
> we'll get agreement on how support should be characterized.  I think we'll 
> get into protracted and unsolvable debate over adjectives like 'some', 
> 'many', 'good', 'broad', 'strong'  etc.  Even a seemingly benign statement 
> like 'there was support from xyz' is going to be debated as support for one 
> piece of a proposal doesnt necessarily mean support for all pieces.
> 
> My strong preference is to leave such descriptions of support  out of the 
> proposal description.
> 
> RT

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