Re: [council] RE: Ooops....[Re: Draft Council letter on the ARR]

[William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes and remove the brackets.

Thanks Kristina,

Bill

On Jan 29, 2010, at 11:21 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> 
> Kristina's suggested rewording more precisely captures what was intended
> in the language.  Would anyone be opposed to replacing the previously
> braketed sentence with Kristina's version?  Also, would it be okay to
> remove the brackets?
> 
> Chuck 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
>> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 2:57 PM
>> To: GNSO Council List
>> Subject: RE: [council] RE: Ooops....[Re: Draft Council letter 
>> on the ARR]
>> 
>> 
>> I had originally flagged that language because it was not 
>> clear to me whether the reference to GNSO included 
>> individuals, which should, if we're being accurate, then 
>> require reference to At Large.  
>> 
>> I did not pick up on it through inadvertent oversight, not 
>> because it was not an issue.
>> 
>> Now that I've read the actual report, I think the language is 
>> inaccurate because the report refers to "generic name 
>> registrants". (I assume reference to generic is used in 
>> contract to cc names.)  
>> 
>> I could live with "It might also be noted that registrants in 
>> gTLDs, the policies for which are developed by the GNSO, pay 
>> fees that fund well over 90% of ICANN's activities."  
>> 
>> Or, we could just take it out.
>> 
>> K
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
>> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 2:33 PM
>> To: William Drake
>> Cc: GNSO Council List
>> Subject: RE: [council] RE: Ooops....[Re: Draft Council letter 
>> on the ARR]
>> 
>> 
>> Bill,
>> 
>> What I meant was that no objections were raised during the 
>> full Council discussion and vote. 
>> 
>> Tim 
>> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [council] RE: Ooops....[Re: Draft Council letter 
>> on the ARR]
>> From: William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Fri, January 29, 2010 11:44 am
>> To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> Tim,
>> On Jan 29, 2010, at 5:10 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:
>> 
>> There were no questions or objections raised regarding that 
>> sentence so I believe it was assumed to be part of the letter. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 19, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
>> 
>> I disagree with the characterization and it will likely be an 
>> issue among other Non-contracted party councilors.  
>> Nonetheless, I agree that the letter should go to Council for 
>> review, and we can tinker with it later.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
 Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
***********************************************************