RE: [council] Attendance at Council meetings

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP" <mcade@xxxxxxx>]

I agree with Thomas. 

Jeff, you had previously indicated that you thought the Registry Constituency 
may have problems participating on this issue. I take it from your email below 
that you've reconsidered on that front. 

Do you want to designate someone to help to organize the informational session, 
which is certainly intended to be open to all interested parties, as far as I 
am concerned. 

202-255-7348c
mcade@xxxxxxx


-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Roessler [mailto:roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:36 AM
To: Neuman, Jeff
Cc: 'Bruce Tonkin'; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'jeffrey@xxxxxxxxx';
'twomey@xxxxxxxxx'; 'ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: Re: [council] Attendance at Council meetings


On 2003-10-15 09:22:09 -0500, Jeff Neuman wrote:

> In addition, I would like to raise another concern involving
> openness and transparency.  It has come to our attention that the
> Business Constituency has attempted to arrange a private meeting
> during the Tunisia meeting with several other constituencies
> (including the ISPs, the Registrars, the ALAC, etc.) to discuss
> the Wildcard Service and introduction of registry services in
> general.  

The meeting that's being planned in cooperation with the ALAC is
supposed to be an information and discussion event that is open to
the public; there is no interest in excluding any individual
constituency.

-- 
Thomas Roessler  <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At-Large Advisory Committee: http://alac.info/