<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] amendments to original JAS motion
- To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] amendments to original JAS motion
- From: Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 11:05:38 +1100
- Accept-language: en-US, en-AU
- Acceptlanguage: en-US, en-AU
- Cc: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <AANLkTi=yaWsO-bmm32Kb2EQ6t8XJKf4OsvDTSxYpG10F@mail.gmail.com>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <AANLkTimqBjNe8NNadZx6ZP-FQS0z5ireV640JcAMe4Ne@mail.gmail.com> <8CEF048B9EC83748B1517DC64EA130FB43EF577A0C@off-win2003-01.ausregistrygroup.local> <AANLkTi=yaWsO-bmm32Kb2EQ6t8XJKf4OsvDTSxYpG10F@mail.gmail.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Acut/BJsWPxJgavfQdm25XBcDzQBvQAAh+ng
- Thread-topic: [council] amendments to original JAS motion
Right you are Rafik. My sincerest of apologies to you.
Clearly I don’t read motions closely enough. You be interested to know that I
actually don’t read yours for amusement, I save that for anything that Stephane
produces. Thanks for letting me read them though. I appreciate it.
Look forward to voting on your motion.
Adrian Kinderis
From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, 7 January 2011 10:47 AM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: Council GNSO; Glen de Saint Géry
Subject: Re: [council] amendments to original JAS motion
Hi Adrian,
always happy to amuse you and let you enjoying reading motions ... but you
should check more carefully next time, you will find the rationale was to
correct a typo ;)
Rafik
2011/1/7 Adrian Kinderis
<adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
h) is interesting Rafik.
Adrian Kinderis
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On
Behalf Of Rafik Dammak
Sent: Friday, 7 January 2011 7:44 AM
To: Council GNSO; Glen de Saint Géry
Subject: [council] amendments to original JAS motion
Hello,
I would like to suggest those friendly amendments (as compromise) to the
original JAS motion proposed by me and seconded by Bill:
I would like propose changing:
a) change "Establish the criteria for financial need and a method of
demonstrating that need." to "Propose the criteria for financial need and a
method of demonstrating that need."
b) change "Definition of mechanisms, e.g. a review committee that would need to
be established operating under the set " to "Propose mechanisms, e.g. a review
committee that could be established operating under the set "
c) Propose mechanism(s) for revenue income and other asset management to
support new gTLD applicants who meet the criteria as established in objective
(a) of this charter amendment.
d) Discuss with Backend Registry Service Providers the extent of of
coordination, to be given by Backend Registry Service Providers (e.g. brokering
the relationships, reviewing the operational quality of the relationship) and
propose methods for coordinating that assistance.
e) change "Discuss and establish methods" to "Discuss and propose" methods
f) change "Establish methods" to "Propose methods"
g) change "establish policies and practices" to "propose policies and
practices"
h) replace "propose a percentage of that fee could be waived for applicants
meeting the requirements for assistance."
with "propose a percentage of that fee that could be waived for applicants
meeting the requirements for assistance."
Regards
Rafik Dammak
Twitter: @rafik
Linkedin: http://tn.linkedin.com/in/rafikdammak
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|