<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [liaison6c] Re: [council] Draft Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws Relating to GNSO Restructure
- To: <avri@xxxxxxx>, <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [liaison6c] Re: [council] Draft Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws Relating to GNSO Restructure
- From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:47:07 +0200
- Cc: <policy-staff@xxxxxxxxx>, <liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <1239031805.15536.7982.camel@bower>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Acm2zvBtwkh0eehPBU+dRVpN0co65Q==
- Thread-topic: [liaison6c] Re: [council] Draft Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws Relating to GNSO Restructure
- User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.14.0.081024
In my view it is crucial that you are shown by staff that this is indeed
incorrect. Otherwise, we find ourselves in a situation, already suggested by
some on this thread, where staff are going further than just supporting the
Council in coming up with proposals, but are instead attempting to dictate
which proposals we should be coming up with.
I can only share your hope, Avri, that this is not the case. I agree that a
new draft of the proposed bylaws would clearly allay that fear.
Stéphane
Le 06/04/09 17:30, « Avri Doria » <avri@xxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
> On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 11:12 -0400, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> I would love to be shown, by a change in the proposed charter
>> amendments, that I was wrong.
>
> Correction:
>
> I would love to be shown, by a change in the proposed _By-Laws_
> amendments, that I was wrong.
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|