<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ispcp] RAP Uniformity of Reporting recommendation is coming back to the Council
- To: "'Mike O'Connor'" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [ispcp] RAP Uniformity of Reporting recommendation is coming back to the Council
- From: "tony holmes" <tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 07:13:21 +0100
- Cc: <ispcp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=s1024; t=1338272003; bh=ghK8xMayB+LAlZv/LY+rGirF0cbG33D0l40B162iDq8=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=ndW8oeIcS0ln813nETuJh3q8z8WKhlJ59N+JPADyIzLnIgLue5T0mX4QiZMoN6DIAnMYYomIPxNZIQOq1PWWq3qXw6Y9l5pPNgq4hGU3CPlz3iI4Ezqx0s2IZ0VlKpwUDie+B3krIbl6uAofLb99cd2A6mRCUm1WlWopvO0XL4g=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btinternet.com; h=DKIM-Signature:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=DA+FVojJjXOG9LMl+Zw/iqYeMpM2aIXU5Xg9+MGR8aMyL62BqzDKF7aSif1lFEzHgxS+jz/RCWXmFVZh/Mt98ZvOm9C1n2NklSmCPyGTJaC1dJpcCUNucUzNflfwOOxKlb6UDfuxM81pWeOaNlhQSdO0KV5hmsJpeeCMGY2CusY= ;
- In-reply-to: <6AD8A0F3-D931-48E1-A18E-638E4CFEBF56@haven2.com>
- List-id: ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <6AD8A0F3-D931-48E1-A18E-638E4CFEBF56@haven2.com>
- Sender: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AQFenC5NVL8JFwbdQI7aaxQ7f7I6jpe9ixfQ
Mikey
Thanks for this. ISPCP councillors are bound to follow agreed Constituency
positions and we have not debated this, so again I'll add to the agenda for
tomorrow.
Regards
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
Sent: 28 May 2012 18:10
To: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ispcp] RAP Uniformity of Reporting recommendation is coming back
to the Council
hi all,
i'd like to slip one more item in front of you, since the topic is likely to
come up at the next Council meeting. word on the street is that now that
the Council has the report back from Compliance, they're likely to tube the
whole project with the standard hand-wringing over how there's such a
workload problem.
so here's a little rant that i just dashed off that tries to make the case
on the other side. i would point out that this was a unanimous-consensus
recommendation of the working-group, so at a minimum i'd like to see a darn
nifty rationale back from the Council if they decide to kill it.
here's my rant:
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|