Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] rev 2.19-1 after listening to the phone call.

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On 22 Oct 2010, at 00:18, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:

> On 10/21/10 3:05 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> But we held a poll.
> 
> Where are the results? Not the summary, but results that show how each WG 
> member is represented as having indicated a preference?
> 

Not sure, I think Evan was going to release that.

but are you claiming we lied?
or do you just want to try and get people to change their poll?

and people wonder why i hate unscientific quick polling and think that it 
causes more problems than it solves.

a.


> 
>> On 21 Oct 2010, at 21:28, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On continuity:
>>> 
>>> I agree with Tijani on the WG's on-list and on-call record is that there 
>>> was more support for 6 months than for 12 or 36
>> 
>> on this one the wording on the poll could be seen as ambiguous.
>> And that is why I asked the question which no one has answered yet.
>> 
>> Tell does it really make that great a diference between 6 months and 12 
>> months?
>> 
>> I understand that there was consensus for less than 36.  but is 6 versus 12 
>> a criticial issue?
>> if so, why?
>> 
>> 
>>> months.
>>> 
>>> On eligibility:
>>> 
>>> I agree with Tijani on the WG's on-list and on-call record is that the 
>>> opposition to support for entrepreneurs from developing countries who meet 
>>> the need criterion was very limited.
>> 
>> On this one, I think the pool was quite clear and I interpret it as people 
>> who had not spoken up before, spoke up in the poll.
>> 
>> That is part of running the poll.
>> 
>> a.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>