ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-osc]


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

Re: [gnso-osc] FW: GNSO Operating Procedures Final Drafts

  • To: Ray Fassett <ray@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Avri Doria'" <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-osc] FW: GNSO Operating Procedures Final Drafts
  • From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:15:50 +0200

Don't mention it Ray. Thanks for your sterling work on the OSC.

Stéphane


Le 14/09/09 18:18, « Ray Fassett » <ray@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> Thanks for the input Stephane, very helpful.
> 
> Ray
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 5:16 AM
> To: Ray Fassett; 'Avri Doria'; gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-osc] FW: GNSO Operating Procedures Final Drafts
> 
> Thanks Ray,
> 
> I think that makes it a lot clearer.
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> 
> Le 13/09/09 23:50, « Ray Fassett » <ray@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> 
>> Does the language below make things clearer?
>> 
>> iii. The leading candidate will be defined as the one with the highest
>> score.  The score will be determined by adding together the voting
>> percentages attained from each house.  The highest percentage attainable
> in
>> each house is 100.  Thus the maximum score a candidate can achieve is 200
> as
>> a result of attaining 100% of the votes from the contracted party house
> and
>> 100% from the non-contracted party house (100% + 100% = score of 200).
>> 
>> Ray
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 4:16 PM
>> To: Avri Doria; gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: Ray Fassett
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc] FW: GNSO Operating Procedures Final Drafts
>> Importance: High
>> 
>> Thanks Avri. Yes, I think people who understand the process like we do
> won't
>> have any need for any further explanation but, as I pointed out and you
> seem
>> to agree, the doc would be much easier to grasp for the non ICANN insiders
>> if this was explicitly stated in it.
>> 
>> Once again, just a small thing but one which may help make the doc more
>> readable.
>> 
>> Stéphane
>> 
>> 
>> Le 13/09/09 22:07, « Avri Doria » <avri@xxxxxxx> a écrit :
>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> quick answer(not that this help the doc in itself)
>>> 
>>> 100% in contracted parties house + 100% in non-contracted parties
>>> house = maximum of 200 possible score.
>>> 
>>> a.
>>> 
>>> On 13 Sep 2009, at 20:53, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Thanks Chuck,
>>>> 
>>>> Just one small comment on article 4.1.b.iii which seems unclear to
>>>> me in the way it¹s written. It makes it hard for anyone not well
>>>> versed in the voting system to understand where the 200 score comes
>>>> from.
>>>> 
>>>> Otherwise the document looks fine.
>>>> 
>>>> Stéphane
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy