ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[soac-newgtldapsup-wg]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [spam] Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Milestone report update

  • To: Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [spam] Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Milestone report update
  • From: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:57:41 +0900

I think that I can express a disagreement and opinion regarding the outcome
of some actions , only if you want prevent me from such right?

Rafik

2011/3/24 Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>

>  Rafik,
>
>
>
> During our face to face meeting in San Francisco, it was agreed that we
> finalize the milestone report according to the comments received, including
> the GAC comment. It was one of the decisions of the meeting that you
> attended as co-chair and GNSO liaison (see item 8. b of the notes from the
> meeting sent by Carlton).
>
>
>
> I understand the position of Elaine who didn’t attend the meeting, but you…
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
>
> Executive Director
>
> *M*editerranean *F*ederation of* I*nternet *A*ssociations
>
> *Phone : *+ 216 70 825 231
>
> *Mobile : *+ 216 98 330 114
>
> *Fax     :* + 216 70 825 231
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *De :* Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Envoyé :* mercredi 23 mars 2011 23:36
> *À :* Tijani BEN JEMAA
> *Cc :* SOAC-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx; Karla Valente
> *Objet :* [spam] Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Milestone report update
>
>
>
> hello,
>
>
>
> I don't agree with such approach, I think we reached in not easy way
> consensus about those issues for our milestone report and we agreed about.
> we cannot open endlessly which is supposed to be closed issues instead
> working in the tasks asked by our chartering organizations.
>
> I think that the GAC had consultation with the board and expressed its
> concerns on such issue and the board respond/will respond to it.
>
> I am personally against specific treatment for governmental para-statal
> applications as they have more channels and possibilities to get funding
> from several sources compared to NGO for example.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>   Rafik
>
>
>
> 2011/3/24 Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Since the GAC requested to include the governmantal applications from least
> developing countries in the eligible categories for support, I propose to
> modify the paragraph 2.9 (c) of the milestone report to read:
>
>
>
> Purely Governmental or para-statal applicants except those coming from the
> least developed countries (though applicants with some limited Government
> support might be eligible for exception)
>
>
>
> I also would like to make a small modification to the definition of
> Developing Countries, Emerging Markets/Nations in the glossary in this way:
>
>
>
> *Developing Countries; Emerging Markets/Nations*
>
>
>
> These terms are often used in this Report. The WG has not adopted any
> specific classification and recommends using a classification that is
> internationally agreed upon, for example, G-77 or United Nations or World
> Bank classifications. The WG notes that these organizations might update
> their classifications from time to time. Also, the WG acknowledges that
> agencies that in the future participate in the *Support Development
> Program* as funding agencies might adopt their own developing countries
> and emerging market/nations classification
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
>
> Directeur exécutif
>
> *F*édération *M*éditerranéenne des *A*ssociations d'*I*nternet
>
> *Phone : *+ 216 70 825 231
>
> *Mobile : *+ 216 98 330 114
>
> *Fax     :* + 216 70 825 231
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *De :* owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx] *De la part de* Karla Valente
> *Envoyé :* mardi 22 mars 2011 22:14
> *À :* Cintra Sooknanan
> *Cc :* SOAC-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx; rudi@xxxxxxx
> *Objet :* RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] FW: New JAS WG members - welcome!
>
>
>
> Thanks. I will update the wiki request as well.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Karla Valente
>
> +1 310 936 4639
>
>
>
> *From:* Cintra Sooknanan [mailto:cintra.sooknanan@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 2:06 PM
> *To:* Karla Valente
> *Cc:* SOAC-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx; rudi@xxxxxxx
> *Subject:* Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] FW: New JAS WG members - welcome!
>
>
>
> Dear Karla,
>
>
>
> I forwarded my email regarding reduction of fees to Rudi this morning at
>
> rudi@xxxxxxx.
>
> Regards
>
> Cintra
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Dear all:
>
>
>
> This e-mail rudi.vasnick@xxxxxxx got bounced back. Does anyone know the
> correct address?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Karla Valente
>
> +1 310 936 4639
>
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________
> *From:* postmaster@internal [mailto:postmaster@internal<postmaster@internal>]
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 1:50 PM
> *To:* Karla Valente
> *Subject:* Undeliverable: New JAS WG members - welcome!
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
>
>
> *Delivery has failed to these recipients or distribution lists:*
>
>
>
> rudi.vasnick@xxxxxxx
> The recipient's e-mail address was not found in the recipient's e-mail
> system. Microsoft Exchange will not try to redeliver this message for you.
> Please check the e-mail address and try resending this message, or provide
> the following diagnostic text to your system administrator.
>
>
>
> The following organization rejected your message: mailproxy1.rack66.net.
>
>
>
> *  _____  *
>
> Sent by Microsoft Exchange Server 2007
>
>
>
>
> *Diagnostic information for administrators:*
>
>
>
> Generating server: exc.icann.org
>
>
>
> rudi.vasnick@xxxxxxx
> mailproxy1.rack66.net #550 5.1.1 <rudi.vasnick@xxxxxxx>: Recipient address
> rejected: User unknown in relay recipient table ##
>
>
>
> Original message headers:
>
>
>
> Received: from EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org ([64.78.22.232]) by
>  EXPFE100-1.exc.icann.org ([64.78.22.236]) with mapi; Tue, 22 Mar 2011
>  13:49:31 -0700
> From: Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "SOAC-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <SOAC-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
> CC: "admin@xxxxxxxxxxx" <admin@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "hackshawt@xxxxxx"
>         <hackshawt@xxxxxx>, "alice@xxxxxxx" <alice@xxxxxxx>, "
> rudi.vasnick@xxxxxxx"
>         <rudi.vasnick@xxxxxxx>, "silber.mike@xxxxxxxxx" <
> silber.mike@xxxxxxxxx>,
>         "fouadbajwa@xxxxxxxxx" <fouadbajwa@xxxxxxxxx>
> Importance: high
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:48:47 -0700
> Subject: New JAS WG members - welcome!
> Thread-Topic: New JAS WG members - welcome!
> Thread-Index: Acvo0ooaRY2Dx8bZSTaiESCdLZ8TZA==
> Message-ID: <
> 05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7E5D48325EF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Accept-Language: en-US
> Content-Language: en-US
> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
> X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
> acceptlanguage: en-US
> Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
>
> boundary="_004_05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7E5D48325EFEXVPMBX1001ex_"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy