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

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The question is who are the original proponents of each proposal?  As
Kristina points out, that information is important in a report.

All the rest is unnecessary (supporters and additional signatories).

RA

Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.


 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 2:47 PM
To: 'kstubbs@xxxxxxxxxxxx'; 'eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Cc: 'mike@xxxxxxxxxx'; 'Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx'
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items


Aren't the supporters just the people who favored a position in the poll?

Yes RACK added signatories, but JN2 got votes. I suppose JN2 could have
wasted paper getting signatories, but we chose to do it for polling time.

I think neither should be included.  But if they are, then both the
"signatories" and "supporters" should be along with the list of "those that
could live with."

The proposals should stand on their own in the initial report.  You can
advocate and spin as much as you want later on your "diversity" point later
although I think that argument is pretty weak.

Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
Vice President, Law & Policy
NeuStar, Inc.
Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx



----- Original Message -----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mike O'Connor <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
<Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thu Jul 22 14:31:57 2010
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items


  Ken Stubbs wrote:

Jeff,
Lets not try to turn this into some last minute subversive move by 
RACK+  to include a list of supporters.
The supporter list has been included in every RACK  proposal that was 
submitted to this WG starting
as far back as the middle of May.

The IPC proposal has a detailed list of 15+ participants and I have no 
problem with that as well
There are also references in the CAM proposal to the proposers as well.

I have no problems with including WG supporters on any of the proposals.

Ken


On 7/22/2010 1:19 PM, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:
> 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.
>
>