<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] Revised Community Travel Support Procedure
- To: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>, "Council GNSO" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] Revised Community Travel Support Procedure
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 10:10:37 -0400
- In-reply-to: <215758B1CB7945EA9C06A856FB3BBB18@PSEVO>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <32535.4590.qm@web38806.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <001f01c8fe0e$f9734ee0$0202fea9@united.domain> <215758B1CB7945EA9C06A856FB3BBB18@PSEVO>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Acj+DnB4le8mRHZ7Qwa9JCIXThbX4gAAE4XAAABs6SAAAb/YIA==
- Thread-topic: [council] Revised Community Travel Support Procedure
I assume this was sent in jest. :)
Chuck
________________________________
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 9:22 AM
To: 'Council GNSO'
Subject: [council] Revised Community Travel Support Procedure
I can see a strong case for the total travel budget being made
available to all those council members that do not belong to the
contracted parties.
Take it we all agree to this ?
Philip
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|