RE: [council] Draft Council letter on the ARR

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Rafik and Glen.  
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry
        Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:24 AM
        To: Council GNSO
        Subject: FW: [council] Draft Council letter on the ARR
        
        

         

         

        Forwarded From: Rafik Dammak 
        
        

         

        Hello Glen,

         

        I have sent this message to the council list but it doesn't appear yet 
in the GNSO list archive and I am not sure that was received in that list.

        Thanks,

         

        Rafik

         

        2010/1/28 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>

        Hello,

         

        I would like to submit this following edit regarding this part :

         

        "Obviously, any such communications would need to respect reasonable

        restrictions like the review teams' adherence to the Chatham House 
rule, and the SO/ACs should be expected to exercise prudence and to only make 
use of the opportunity when it is necessary to support the teams and/or convey 
major concerns." 

         

        with that one

         

        "It is expected that any communications or other input sought and 
received will be provided in good faith, and that SOs/ACs will exercise 
prudence and make use of the opportunity when it is necessary to support the 
teams and/or convey major concerns. In exceptional circumstances, a SO or AC, 
the review teams or members thereof may consider it necessary to subject such 
communications or other input to reasonable restrictions such as the Chatham 
House rule, and where this is the case, the relevant parties to the affected 
communication or input shall, as far as possible, be informed in advance."

         

        Regards

         

        Rafik

         

        2010/1/28 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

                 

                
                I would accept this as a friendly amendment.  Stephan, as the 
seconder of the motion, would you also accept it as friendly?
                
                Glen - please add this amendment to the motion.
                
                Chuck

                
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx]
                > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 3:36 PM
                > To: Gomes, Chuck; william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
                > council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                > Cc: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
                > Subject: AW: [council] Draft Council letter on the ARR
                >
                > On behalf of the ISPCP constituency I'd like to suggest the
                > following edit regarding "Support Teams" (ST).
                > The draft amendment attached is targeted to provide more
                > flexibility to the Review Teams in order to let themselves
                > organize their support teams rather than to constitute
                > support teams in advance.
                >
                > Looking forward to a fruitful discussion Wolf-Ulrich
                >
                >
                > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
                > Von: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
                > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Januar 2010 23:35
                > An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
                > council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                > Cc: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
                > Betreff: RE: [council] Draft Council letter on the ARR
                >
                > Thanks Wolf.  If you could propose a suggested edit, it would
                > be very helpful.
                >
                > Chuck
                >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                > > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
                > KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx
                > > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 4:36 PM
                > > To: william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 
council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                > > Cc: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
                > > Subject: AW: [council] Draft Council letter on the ARR
                > >
                > >
                > > Following a consultation within the ISPCP constituency I'd 
like to
                > > address the creation of "Support Teams" (ST). There must be 
a clear
                > > distinction between the RTs and potential STs in order to 
avoid STs
                > > emerging to "shadow" RTs. So the composition of the ST 
pools has
                > > carefully to be taken into consideration or should even be
                > regulated.
                > > If applicable this should be expressed in the council 
response.
                > >
                > > Apart from that the ISPCP constituency endorses the draft 
response.
                > >
                > > Wolf-Ulrich
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
                > > Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                > > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von 
William Drake
                > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. Januar 2010 16:40
                > > An: GNSO Council List
                > > Betreff: [council] Draft Council letter on the ARR
                > >
                > > Hello,
                > >
                > > Attached please find the drafting team's proposed response 
to the
                > > draft proposal on the Affirmation Reviews Requirements and
                > > Implementation Processes, for discussion with our
                > respective SGs and
                > > in the Council.
                > >
                > > Best,
                > >
                > > Bill
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >