Mime-Version: |
1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
Date: |
Sun, 2 May 2010 23:16:28 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Sender: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi,
I have read through your extensive edits and on first reading, I have a question and a comment:
- the question: I do not understand why you have highlighted section in yellow. do you mean that the charter should have these things highlighted.
- On the question of constituencies.
The board has already approved two Stakeholder Groups charters that do not have constituencies. As I understood our conversations with the SIC and the Board they are not requiring constituencies so long as we have a clear charter and we explain the decisions we have made. This is the purpose of the cover letter which is still being worked.
Yours is the first call I have seen from within the NCSG for us to continue with formal constituencies and I do not know if there is any other support for it with the NCSG membership.
At this point unless I see strong support from the members, I do not think it is something we should change.
I will look through the rest of your proposed edits in detail.
a.
On 2 May 2010, at 22:31, Rosemary Sinclair wrote:
> Hi Avri and everyone
>
> Some thoughts for discussion
>
> Cheers
>
> Rosemary
>
> Rosemary Sinclair
> Managing Director, ATUG
> Chairman, INTUG
> T: +61 2 94958901 F: +61 2 94193889
> M: +61 413734490
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Skype: rasinclair
|
|
|