Re: [soac-mapo] Final Rec 6 CWG Charter

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

That is exactly what I was trying to say, and 
thought I had ("we will have to work rather hard 
to get a report out for that date, but there 
would be no time for each SO/AC to formally 
incorporate their comments in that time-frame").
Alan

At 27/08/2010 04:23 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> From my listening (from that wonderful 
> 'innovation' - the live streaming), I thought 
> they acknowledged that delivering the report by 
> the 13th was challenging but possible.
> What I gathered they thought was close to, if 
> not actually, impossible* was delivering a 
> report that had incorporated the comments from 
> the 3 Chartering organizations.  Perhaps that is 
> what Alan was referring to as impossible.
> a.
>
> *personal view - nothing is impossible in a 
> 'bureaucracy', it just takes inordinate 
> concentration of the  will  of many and an 
> indefinitely large amount of persistence to produce miracles
> On 27 Aug 2010, at 15:07, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
>
> >
> > True, some on the Council think it is an impossible date, but others don't.
> >
> > It cannot be said that the GNSO Council 
> recognized this as an impossible target. That is just not true.
> >
> > Stéphane
> >
> > Le 27 août 2010 à 17:56, Alan Greenberg a écrit :
> >
> >> I note that at the GNSO meeting yesterday, 
> there was a discussion about the sentence in 
> Operational Guidelines & Timeline that says:
> >>
> >> "The Rec6 CWG should deliver a report with 
> comments from the ALAC, GAC and GNSO Council 
> not later than 13 September 2010 to meet the 
> 11-day advance publication that the Board 
> requests for its retreat on new gTLDs."
> >>
> >> It was generally accepted that this timeline 
> is not at all possible, since we will have to 
> work rather hard to get a report out for that 
> date, but there would be no time for each SO/AC 
> to formally incorporate their comments in that 
> time-frame. There was some discussion that it 
> could be reworded to say the report was due by 
> the 13th and the SO/ACc would deliver comments 
> after that date. However, most at the meeting 
> were willing to just leave the words along, 
> even though it was recognized as an impossible target.
> >>
> >> Alan
> >>
> >> At 27/08/2010 11:23 AM, Liz Gasster wrote:
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> The final CWG Charter is attached for your reference.
> >>>
> >>> Best, Liz
> >>>
> >
> >