ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


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

RE: [council] Term limits

  • To: <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>, <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Term limits
  • From: <Lucy.Nichols@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 13:03:27 -0600
  • Cc: <council@xxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <45536FD6.1080505@tucows.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AccELEayrLF7H3MLTfSX/QknhjnKrAABVMYA
  • Thread-topic: [council] Term limits

I support discussion of the issues surrounding term limits as
articulated in Ross' proposed resolution.

Lucy  

>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext Ross Rader
>Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 11:14 AM
>To: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx
>Cc: council@xxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [council] Term limits
>
>
>
>philip.sheppard@xxxxxx wrote:
>> Fellow Council Members,
>> before we leap to a resolution on term limits could we possibly have 
>> some discussion on their MERITS?
>
>
>I don't think we're "leaping" - please don't over-react. If I 
>read Bruce's message correctly, we need to have a motion on 
>the table in order to have a discussion of the issues on the 
>agenda. Since I am interested in having a discussion on this 
>issue, I thought it would be best to table a straw motion that 
>would clear the procedural hurdle in order to have a 
>discussion. The enthusiasm you are seeing, I believe, is 
>simply indicative of support for a discussion of the issues 
>surrounding term limits - which in reading your messages, you 
>would seem to support as well.
>
>-ross
>




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