NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:38:56 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (34 lines)
On 30 Oct 2012, at 21:27, Robin Gross wrote:

> ISSUE:					
> 
> Trademark Clearinghouse Documents
> Comment Closed:  15 October
> Reply Close:  7 November 2012
> 
> Protection of International Olympic Committee (IOC) / Red Cross Names (RCRC) Drafting Team – Recommendations  	
> Comment Closed
> Reply Close: 9 November 2012

i submitted a comment on this. Might be an idea to have a NCSG reply comment submitted that included reference to my comments and some of the IOC/RCRC comments submitted. I will probably work up a reply of my own and am willing to help with this.

> 
> Community Input Draft 2013-2016 Strategic Plan 
> Comment Close:  13 November 2012 
> Reply Close:  4 December 2012

I am willing to work on this one.  It is something I have avoided thinking about becasue I never believed it made much of a difference - it seemed a set of platitudes meant for laminating.  At this point, with new leadership that might take the volunteer position serious (jury is still out on this) it seems worth paying attention to.

> 
> Application for New GNSO Constituency Candidacy-"Public Internet Access/Cybercafe Ecosystem"
> Comment Close: 17 November 2012 
> Reply Close: 17 December 2012
> 

Our EC has the main task here.  How is the WG doing on coming up with a recommendation?  I think more than comment our EC needs to make a decision that is communicated to the applicant and to the Board.  In this case I think individual NCSG member comments are more important.

avri


> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2