RE: [registrars] Discussion of Motion to adopt Tasting Position Statement [Tim Ruiz's motion].

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Paul.

> the more members who understand how things work, the more 
> involvement there may be when it comes time for input 
> and/or voting.

Completely agree.

Tim 


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [registrars] Discussion of Motion to adopt Tasting 
Position Statement [Tim Ruiz's motion].
From: Paul Goldstone <paulg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, November 14, 2007 11:29 pm
To: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Registrar Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Nevett,Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Tim,

Thanks for taking the time to compile the statement.

I also really appreciate the time you and others are willing to take 
out of your schedule to explain things when asked. I'm sure it may 
seem frustrating at times, but the more members who understand how 
things work, the more involvement there may be when it comes time for 
input and/or voting.

Your motion seems to cover all views, so I have no other ammendments 
to suggest.

Regards,
~Paul


At 04:32 PM 11/14/2007, Tim Ruiz wrote:
>An explanation probably isn't necessary since it is intended to be a
>constituency statement about an already intitated PDP.
>
>My thinking behind the motion was based on previous discussions at RC
>meetings, the two ICANN workshops, the discussions and work of the ad
>hoc WG, and other conversations that took place on and off the record.
>
>So basically, I volunteered myself as the representative to compile the
>statement by posting the motion, thinking it would speed up our normally
>drawn out processes (based on our rules of procedure) and allow us to
>get a statement in within the 35-day window.
>
>Again, I am open to amendments. Just suggest some wording and get an
>endorsement.
>
>
>Best,
>
>Tim 
>
>