Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] On staggered fees versus reduced fees

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Well I guess that is the co-chair's call - aren't you glad it isn't our 
decision to make?

In any case  I assume Michele would be entitled to attach a minority statement 
to the final report if he so wished.

I just don't want the JAS WG to be held responsible for not reflecting the 
views of all members in our final report.  That would be a terrible way to 
prejudice our output.

Going back under my rock on this issue now.

a.


On 23 Aug 2011, at 13:28, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

> 
> The recommendation for fee reduction achieved complete consensus pre-MR2 and 
> need not need be revisited. We don't have the luxury of constant hindsight 
> with one week left.
> 
> 
> - Evan
> 
> 
> 
> On 23 August 2011 13:15, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The point I take from this, is that while we probaby have rough/near 
> consensus, Michele's note indicates that we do not have full consensus on 
> this issue.
> 
> For the record I support the notion of recommending both.
> 
> And if it had to be either/or would sooner drop the staggered fee 
> recommendation, which I beleive the staff indicated would be impractical, 
> than i would drop the fee reduction recommendation/advice.
> 
> a.
> 
> On 23 Aug 2011, at 08:58, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> 
> >
> > On 23 August 2011 06:43, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight 
> > <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > To be perfectly honest I'd be more supportive of staggered fees than I 
> > would be of reduced fees
> >
> >
> > The point is that it shouldn't be either/or. Both are valid.
> >
> > - Evan
> >
> >
> 
> ------
> Pick your poison: Kool-Aid or Hemlock!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>