RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] New Revised SRSU Text

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Kristina,

 

With respect for your efforts, the entire section is vastly overly detailed
and does not fly.  There is no need to detail which constituencies proposed
what and which proposal supported, etc., etc.  Moreover, SRMU has not had
nearly enough discussion to warrant inclusion in this report.  The point of
SRSU that we all agree on is that the majority of this WG believes that
there is possibility for consensus (of some kind) at some point in the
future.  That is all this section needs to say.

 

Thanks,

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

President

 

RNA Partners, Inc.

220 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10001

+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 12:27 PM
To: gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] New Revised SRSU Text

 

All, 

I've attached a clean copy of further revised SRSU text that I think (and
hope) addresses the concerns raised and reflects input by several WG members
that had been deleted in the current IR text.  [Richard, I summarized your
BRU1 text b/c everyone else had 1 sentence and BRU1 was two paragraphs.]  I
*do not* copy it below because doing so drops the footnotes.

I have also attached two comparisons.  One is a comparison of the "new"
clean text against the text that's currently in the Initial Report (the
"current IR SRSU redline"). The other comparison is of the new "clean" text
against what was submitted on Wednesday afternoon ("07212010 IR SRSU
redline").

Please let me know if you have questions.  

K 

 

<<07212010 IR SRSU redline.DOC>> <<Current IR SRSU redline.DOC>> <<KR
changes to IR SRSU text.DOC>>