ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-vi-feb10]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items

  • To: Kathy Kleiman <kKleiman@xxxxxxx>, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@xxxxxxxxx>, "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
  • From: Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:31:26 -0700

Kathy - I assumed RACK was also meant to show diversity in its title, unless 
you named the proposal after a medieval torture device :)



From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 10:02 AM
To: Sivasubramanian M; Mike O'Connor
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items

But this has been a part of the RACK proposal since the beginning - to show the 
signatories, as they grew, and their diversity. As JN2 shows that diversity 
within its title (Jeff and Jon), so too RACK shows it in the signatories.
Best,

Kathy Kleiman
Director of Policy
.ORG The Public Interest Registry
Direct: +1 703 889-5756  Mobile: +1 703 371-6846

Visit us online!
Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz!<http://www.pir.org/orgbuzz>
Find us on Facebook | 
dotorg<http://www.facebook.com/pages/dotorg/203294399456?v=wall>
See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr<http://flickr.com/orgbuzz>
See our video library on YouTube<http://youtube.com/orgbuzz>

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If 
received in error, please inform sender and then delete.



From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Sivasubramanian M
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 12:25 PM
To: Mike O'Connor
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items

Mike,

This is just a point about uniformity of the format of proposals as featured in 
the draft report.  On page 78, Rack + shows a list of supporters which was 
possibly a section that the Rack + draft included to list co-proposers. But in 
the draft report, Rack + happens to be the only proposal that shows a list of 
supporters. Outsiders may get the impression (on a rapid glance) that Rack + is 
the 'most supported' proposal, in the absence of a similar list of supporters 
in the other proposals. So this part of the Rack + proposal may please be 
deleted.


Sivasubramanian M


On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Mike O'Connor 
<mike@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

again, sorry if this is "too much information" but we've just had an intense 
storm run through here.  i need to go see if i still have a road to drive on.

i'm hoping a) to be back on the air in about an hour and b) to see a way 
forward on those two remaining issues when i get back.

looks like we're seeing some conversation on Antony's thread.  Jeff, stir 
yourself one last time and help us get your issue closed.

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.)


________________________________
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.


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy