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

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

hi Milton,

we had a pretty lively debate about this on the call.  here's the resolution...

-- proposal language is owned by proposal-advocates.  they get to put whatever 
they want to put in their documents

-- if people would like to add lists of proponents to *their* proposals, get 
those lists to me by 2400 GMT tonight.

mikey


On Jul 22, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> I see that some of us are still in marketing/promotion mode, not 
> consensus-report mode.
> Can we all try to be objective about getting an accurate report together, and 
> stop trying to sneak in plugs?
>  
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 3:45 PM
> To: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx; Phil Buckingham; owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx; 
> Sivasubramanian M
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx; Mike O'Connor
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
>  
> I just wish that our 2 columns of signatures could have been preserved into 
> the final version (that would take much  less space).
> 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!
> Find us on Facebook | dotorg
> See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr
> See our video library on YouTube
>  
> 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 tim@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 3:24 PM
> To: Phil Buckingham; owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx; Sivasubramanian M
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx; Mike O'Connor
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
>  
> RACK included signatories. Others chose not to. It has been out that way for 
> momths. They are part of the proposal. Removing them is NOT an option unless 
> we're allowed to start editing the proposals as well.
> 
> If anything in RACK is changed or there is any other major change to the 
> report, it should NOT be posted for at least 72 hrs to allow review.
> 
> Tim
> From: "Phil Buckingham" <pjbuckingham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sender: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:19:44 +0100
> To: Sivasubramanian M<isolatedn@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>; Mike O'Connor<mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a couple last items
>  
> Sivasubramanian,
>  
> Good spot- now on page 81 (?)  . Must be consistent across all proposals . 
> This list of supporters MUST be deleted. There must be no indication of any 
> form of  "conflict of interest" between Board members and VI WG members.
> I think I should leave it at that !
>  
> regards
>  
> Phil
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sivasubramanian M
> To: Mike O'Connor
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 5:24 PM
> 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> 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.)
> 
>  

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)