Re: [pdp-pcceg-feb06] Can we move the [pdp-pcceg-feb06 Task Force Report /PDP 06 call by one hour later?

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

If possible I would like to know how many people can make the meeting  
at this time.  I want to make sure that we have enough people to, at  
least for this last meeting, cover each of the constituencies.  The  
vote will span several days (probably 48 hours) after the meeting,  
but I would like to make sure that all constituencies are there to  
agree on the end game process.

If we can't get quorum at this meeting, then we will have to move it  
to another day, since it is impossible to move it to a different hour  
on the same day.  I do _not_ want to do this as that will mess up the  
schedule with bringing this before the next council meeting.

Please let Glen know what your availability is for the meeting if you  
have not already done so.  I will send out  the text I would like us  
to vote on a little later today.  As a reminder, the agenda is:

- Basic meeting prologue (attendance, interest stmts, agenda review)
- Last comments on final draft
  - Liz to cover what has changed since las review
  - Resolution of any issues
    (note, anyone with issues is requested to post them to this
     mailing list before the meeting.  Please note that we will not be
     reopening any substantive issues.)
- Agreement on final process
  - Review text of vote
  - Review schedule for vote
- initiate vote (text in another email to come)

thanks
a.

On 18 apr 2007, at 12.49, Liz Williams wrote:

> Marilyn
>
> I am sorry -- I have other commitments which have been set in place  
> to accommodate this meeting.
>
> Do you want to "record" your support for moving that the report is  
> sent to the Council and that it accurately reflects the discussions  
> and agreements of the group?
>
> I had thought that Philip would be on the call so that he could  
> represent the BC's views if those were different from what is  
> contained in the report?
>
> Kind regards and I apologise -- this week is particularly full.
>
> Liz
> .....................................................
>
> Liz Williams
> Senior Policy Counselor
> ICANN - Brussels
> +32 2 234 7874 tel
> +32 2 234 7848 fax
> +32 497 07 4243 mob
>
>
>
>
> On 18 Apr 2007, at 18:22, Marilyn Cade wrote:
>
> > I am having difficulty in moving a commitment that conflicts with  
> > tomorrow's
> > call. It would be much better to move this call later by an hour. I
> > understand that some others on the group would also find this  
> > helpful. Can
> > we move it later by one hour?
> > I understand that this has been raised by a couple of other  
> > members/can we
> > please accommodate the change to an hour later.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Marilyn
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pdp-pcceg-feb06@xxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-pdp-pcceg-feb06@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 2:22 PM
> > To: pdp-pcceg-feb06@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [pdp-pcceg-feb06] Task Force Report on ,Policies for  
> > Contractual
> > Conditions Existing Registries PDP FEB 06
> >
> > [To: pdp-pcceg-feb06[at]gnso.icann.org]
> >
> >
> > Dear Task Force Members,
> >
> > The final Task Force Report on
> > Policies for Contractual Conditions Existing Registries PDP FEB 06
> > http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-pdp-feb06-tfr-10apr07.pdf
> >
> > is posted on the GNSO website in the  draft documents section
> > http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/
> >
> > There is a Task Force meeting scheduled on Thursday 19 April, UTC  
> > 14:00.
> > Please let me know if you need the dial-in resent and whether  
> > there are
> > any observers you know who may like to join the call.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Glen
> >
> > Glen de Saint Géry
> > GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
> > gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
> > http://gnso.icann.org