<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] Re: A question to the candidate
- To: "Stéphane_Van_Gelder" <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] Re: A question to the candidate
- From: <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:18:01 -0700
- Cc: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Glen_de_Saint_Géry" <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Web-Based Email 5.6.03
<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt;"><div>Dakar is fine, as long as we do not settle for a "we'll
just agree to disagree" conclusion.</div><div><br></div><div>I will not be on
hand, so just imagine I am there to keep poking at this
matter.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div><br></div><div>Berard<br></div>
<blockquote id="replyBlockquote" webmail="1" style="border-left: 2px solid
blue; margin-left: 8px; padding-left: 8px; font-size:10pt; color:black;
font-family:verdana;">
<div id="wmQuoteWrapper">
-------- Original Message --------<br>
Subject: [council] Re: A question to the candidate<br>
From: Stéphane_Van_Gelder <<a
href="http://stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx";>stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
Date: Fri, October 14, 2011 9:41 am<br>
To: <<a
href="mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
Cc: "<a href="mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>" <<a
href="mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>>, <br>
"Glen_de_Saint_Géry" <<a
href="mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx";>Glen@xxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks John. I am unsure whether you expect an answer by email or would prefer
that we "stockpile" this question for the "Q&A with candidate" session that
we have planned in Dakar?<br>
<br>
I would think that the second option is better, as it means everyone can join
the discussion as and when they wish.<br>
<br>
Also, as I am leaving for Dakar tomorrow and will probably be out of email
range for a few days, if anyone else has any questions that would mean I could
address them all at the same time, which might work better.<br>
<br>
Would you be OK with this?<br>
<br>
Stéphane<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 14 oct. 2011 à 17:16, <<a
href="mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>> a écrit
:<br>
<br>
> I forgot to switch my earlier email to plain text. Sorry all.<br>
> <br>
> Berard<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> Stephane,<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> As you think about how you might approach a second term as Chair of the<br>
> Council, I wonder if you could give us your thoughts on this:<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> In the “Discussion Paper on Next Steps to Produce a New Form of the<br>
> RAA” sent to the Council yesterday by Kurt Pritz, is this:<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> "We also note that disagreements in the GNSO Council regarding the<br>
> process over the last year have resulted in delays in considering the<br>
> substantive issues."<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> This is not the first time or the softest way in which we have heard<br>
> this criticism of delay and disharmony. How would you move to solve
it?<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> Cheers,<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> Berard<br>
> <br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote></span></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|