<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] Election of GNSO Council chair
- To: "'Philip Sheppard'" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>, <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] Election of GNSO Council chair
- From: "Liz Williams" <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 15:05:55 +0200
- Cc: "'Alejandro Pisanty'" <apisan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <200510141255.j9ECtYvn031498@turbo.aim.be>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcXQunCCc4xOAA6NTNaL6S0NtDSFsQABJ4+gAAAynvA=
Hi Philip
Yes, will include this. I think it's a good set of questions to ask.
I do, however, take Marilyn's point that this needs to be fixed in the
interim so that we can keep Bruce in the traces for as long as possible!
Liz
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 3:03 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Alejandro Pisanty'
Subject: RE: [council] Election of GNSO Council chair
Ross,
this sounds plausible as a rationale.
But does it reflect reality ?
Liz,
maybe a good question for the review?
ie Is there any evidence (within the GNSo's history) to suggest that more
GNSO business items are concluded at a physical meeting, as opposed to a
telephone meeting?
In particular, were more items concluded at the annual meting than at other
physical meetings?
Philip
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|