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

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Agree.


On 7/22/10 1:05 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
> I think the proposal documents should identify the proponents of each.
>
>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>     [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Kleiman
>     *Sent:* Thursday, July 22, 2010 1:02 PM
>     *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.)