RE: AW: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just boarding for a 10 hr flight so likely my last opportunity to
comment on this.

I would support Tom's suggestion. Being willing to give WGs a try is not
really support for recommendation. We should be clear about all views on
this.

Tim
Sent from Go Daddy Mobile Mail.

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: AW: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform
> From: "Thomas Keller" <tom@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, November 27, 2007 3:01 am
> To: "'Philip Sheppard'" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>,        "'Council
> GNSO'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
>    Hi Philip,
> 
>    as I just wrote in my last mail. I do
>    not think that we are in unanimous
>    agreement of the recommendation
>    therefore we should strike it from the
>    list.
> 
>    tom
>      ___________________________________
>    Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>    [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im
>    Auftrag von Philip Sheppard
>    Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. November 2007
>    09:45
>    An: 'Council GNSO'
>    Betreff: [council] Draft reply Council
>    on GNSO reform
>    If I read Council right (thanks Chuck,
>    Avri, Adrian),
>    I will amend to "qualified support"
>    where I previously wrote "partial
>    support".
> 
>    I think we are all on the same page
>    here.
>    (Chuck we are not advocating task forces
>    here just laying down a marker for
>    flexibility which I note you support).
> 
>    Philip