ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: FW: [registrars] Registrar Statement

  • To: "Robert F. Connelly" <BobC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Registrars Constituency" <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: FW: [registrars] Registrar Statement
  • From: "Nevett, Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:04:41 -0400
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcZlfS7W0Sfra8hFQXe5Q+iG//0fUgAAQZkg
  • Thread-topic: FW: [registrars] Registrar Statement

After discussing with the other Task Force representatives, the
amendment offered by Marcus is unfriendly.  With that said, I would be
happy to discuss the issue to see if there is any room for a consensus
position.  Thanks.  Jon  

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robert F. Connelly
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 3:46 PM
To: Registrars Constituency
Subject: Re: FW: [registrars] Registrar Statement

At 12:25 PM 4/21/06, Nevett, Jonathon wrote:
>Bob:
>
>As we have the three endorsements, is it fair to assume that the 14 day

>clock is ticking?

Dear Jon:  Oh, yes, the clock is ticking.  Your motion as modified to 
accommodate one friendly amendment is before the "house".

I believe that there is one additional amendment which has not yet been 
classified as either friendly or unfriendly.

Regards, BobC

>
>Thanks.
>
>Jon





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>