<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
- To: <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <jcvignes@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <isolatedn@xxxxxxxxx>, <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
- From: "Hammock, Statton" <shammock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:45:04 -0400
+ 1 Jeff. Let the poll speak to who supported which proposals.
Statton
Statton Hammock
Sr. Director, Law, Policy & Business Affairs
Network Solutions
----- Original Message -----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Jean Christophe VIGNES <jcvignes@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Sivasubramanian M
<isolatedn@xxxxxxxxx>; Mike O'Connor <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thu Jul 22 13:19:24 2010
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
What if I support multiple proposals? Should my name be on every proposal I
support? Who is responsible for adding and collecting the supporters for each
proposal?
Maybe if we have supporters we should have opposers listed (not sure if
opposers is a word, may need to ask Palin) .
I am just pointing out how ridiculous this seems to be getting that people want
to show their popularity and who was involved. Is that how we want this to be
judged, by the people who wrote the proposals? How about we actually let the
proposals stand up on their own and be looked at for their merits.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Jean Christophe VIGNES
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 10:09 AM
To: Sivasubramanian M; Mike O'Connor
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
I fully agree. Besides the "supporters" for each proposal do appear clearly in
the Polls so that is at best redundant.
JC
Le 22/07/10 18:24, « Sivasubramanian M » <isolatedn@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
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> 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.)
______________________
Jean-Christophe Vignes
Executive Vice-President & General Counsel DCL Group 2, rue Léon Laval
L-3372 Leudelange
Tel.: +352 20 200 123
Mobile : +352 691 600 424
Fax.: +352 20 300 123
Mailto: JCVignes@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.datacenter.eu | www.eurodns.com | www.voipgate.com
________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this e-mail by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and
delete it from your system. You must not copy the message or disclose its
contents to anyone.
Think of the environment: don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
--------------------------------------------------------
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
>>>
|