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:
Adam Peake <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Adam Peake <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 8 Nov 2003 17:34:55 +0900
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
perhaps not a bad idea, to have a deputy to share ideas with.

Adam



<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00280.html >

Dear Bruce -

The IP constituency is currently looking at appropriate ways to
contribute to the work of the 3 Whois task forces in an efficient
manner. In this context, it is our view that nominating only one
representative to each TF would result in excessive work-load for
each chosen person. 

Therefore, I would like to invoke the last sentence in PDP sec. 5(1)
(i.e. "The Council may increase the number of Representatives per
constituency that may sit on a task force in its discretion in
circumstances that it deems necessary or appropriate.") and would be
very grateful if you could advise on how this provison could be
applied in the present case.

I hope this can be done as swiftly as possible without slowing the
process of convening the TFs. It is our conviction that it would be
both necessary and appropriate to allow for one or more alternates
per task force as the adequate way to proceed.

Kind regards -

Niklas       


------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

ATOM RSS1 RSS2