<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [registrars] Task Force Nomination
- To: "Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Registrars Constituency" <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [registrars] Task Force Nomination
- From: "Elana Broitman" <ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:23:49 -0500
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcOkj2r358q01ajLTeKefN0ZCuhnVAAA6ZSQ
- Thread-topic: [registrars] Task Force Nomination
He is right - there is no requirement of a specific statement, but it is "politic" as you point out.
Elana Broitman
Register.com
575 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
Phone (212) 798-9215
Fax (212) 629-9309
ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert F. Connelly [mailto:rconnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 12:44 PM
To: Registrars Constituency
Subject: RE: [registrars] Task Force Nomination
At 12:04 PM 11/6/03 -0500, Elana Broitman wrote:
>Precedence: bulk
>
>Bob - I also saw an acception and conflict of interest statement from Tom K.
Dear Elana: Thank you, it's been like trying to describe a moving train --
that's leaking fuel;-} And taking on new passengers.
I've updated the Excel sheet accordingly.
Tim Ruiz has raised an interesting point, that there does not appear to be
a requirement for a candidate's statement. I guess it is just our
practice. I wonder whether our members would be impressed by a candidate
who did not say more than "I accept"? Perhaps we would if he or she had
Amadeu's history.
Regards, BobC
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|