<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Draft motion to adopt the GAC Communique
- To: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Draft motion to adopt the GAC Communique
- From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 14:57:35 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Authentication-results: key-Systems.net; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
- In-reply-to: <559E823F.3010700@key-systems.net>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <D1C2F873.44637%marika.konings@icann.org> <559E823F.3010700@key-systems.net>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sn1pr02mb1632: X-MS-Exchange-Organization-RulesExecuted
- Thread-index: AQHQulIgLQEHjs+6xUKyIjz7XV9Gd53S5rOA
- Thread-topic: [council] Draft motion to adopt the GAC Communique
Thanks, Volker.
My only question is whether or not Item #4 (Community Priority
Evaluations) truly involves the implementation of existing gTLD plicy, or
is exclusively a function of the subsequent rounds issues report.
I¹m fine either way, no strong feelings.
Thanks‹
J.
On 7/9/15, 9:16 , "owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Volker
Greimann" <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of
vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Dear fellow councillors,
>
>please find attached a draft motion regarding the Review of the GAC
>Communique by the GNSO for your attention and consideration. Also
>attached is the draft review for your attention and review.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Volker Greimann
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|