<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Revised SRSU text
- To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Revised SRSU text
- From: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:34:21 -0400
If there is no "owner" of the .ngo suggestion, it should come out. My
email indicates that Eric suggested the language to me for the SRSU
text. If it's not his suggestion more broadly and not anyone else's, we
should delete it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 10:24 AM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Revised SRSU text
On 19 Jul 2010, at 18:14, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> Has any NGO asked for an exception? The Red Cross contacted CORE and
it did not, to the best of my knowledge, ask for a SRSU exception. It
asked for a fraud solution and brand protection application, which is
not a registration policy so narrow as to admit only one registrant.
On 20 Jul 2010, at 09:38, <HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Not sure who Eric is referring to. It certainly wasn't me or anyone
> from the American Red Cross.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|