So.  Let's say I think a particular constituency is completely 
useless: captured, undemocratic, not transparent ...  basically a 
sham of what a constituency should be.  I've responded to the LSE 
survey, sent comments, etc.  Tried to provide good clear criticism.

Now my comments, and perhaps many many similar comments, will be 
"corrected" by a single person from that constituency?

Adam



At 3:33 AM -0400 9/2/06, Milton Mueller wrote:
>All:
>Here's the latest development in the GNSO Review. Apparently Carlos
>would prefer that I review it? As you see we cannot circulate even the
>limited sections of the report we are allowed to review. But this does
>indicate that the final report should be forthcoming soon.
>
>===============================
>From: Dunleavy,P
>Sent: 27 August 2006 16:35
>To: constituency contacts
>Cc:
>Subject: Fact checking of GSO Review report sections by constituencies
>
>Dear Colleagues.
>
>I am writing to you in your role as designated Constituency Leader
>within GNSO to seek your assistance with final fact-checking for the
>GNSO Review. We are very grateful for all the assitance and information
>that your constituency has already provided to us, which has materially
>enhanced the value of the report. Before the final report becomes
>public, we would like to give each constituency a chance to look over
>the relevant sections of the report relating to them, so as to  check
>for factual accuracy. I assume that you will be the designated
>representative/s unless we receive immediate notice of another point of
>contact. I very much
>hope that you will be able to help us with this final factual check.
>
>I am afraid that we are only allowed to send you at this stage
>sections
>of the report that relate to your constituency. Please could you also
>respond only with specific editing changes or suggested alternative
>forms of wording if you identify things that you believe are factually
>incorrect. Please note that at this stage general comments are not
>very
>useable and that if you believe something is incorrect we would much
>rather get from you a specific statement that you believe is
>completely
>accurate to replace the problematic text. Brief explanatory comments
>supporting alternative wording suggestions are also useful.There will
>also be some comparative charts and tables, and here please note that
>we
>are unable to take into account comments about other constituencies
>(or
>about the main themes of the report, which will largely not be covered
>in the sections that you see).
>
>We will be sending you (or your nominated representatives) this
>material
>on 29 August. Plese could any comments be emailed back to us no later
>than 5 September. We will respond to comments within two days of
>receipt. It would also be useful to have a contact phone number for the
>person
>originating the comments in case we need more clarification on any
>suggested change or comment.
>
>Lastly, we would strongly ask that the sections of the report provided
>to you should be treated as this stage as completely confidential.
>Please do not circulate the sections of the report to other members
>since this might create a misleading impression of what the review as
>a
>whole is about.
>
>Thank you in advance for your help and please accept my apologies for
>this being anotified to you at short notice.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>
>
>Patrick Dunleavy
>
>Professor of Political Science and Public Policy
>
>London School of Economics and Political Science,
>
>Chair, LSE Public Policy Group
>
>