fine by me, thank Avri.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> The reply period for the delay of the GNSO proposal ends on 6 June.  At todays' meeting there was a strong sentiment in favor of NCSG endorsing the NPOC statement.
>
> What do people think about the following?
>
> I will ask the NCSG Policy  Committee to decide by  6 September whether they beleive this should be submitted in the NCSG's name.
>
> Please comment.
> Any objections?
> Any edits?
>
> -----
>
>
> NCSG wishes to support and endorse the statement submitted by NPOC <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-gnso-review-15jul13/msg00003.html> against any delay in the beginning the next cycle of GNSO reviews.
>
> The NCSG also support comments submitted by:
>
> - ISPCP <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-gnso-review-15jul13/msg00002.html>
> - Google <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-gnso-review-15jul13/msg00001.html>
>
> against any delay in the beginning of the next cyle of GNSO reviews.
>
> The NCSG wishes to add the following comments to this Reply:
>
> We beleive that with the ATRT2 to publish its report by the end of 2013, the timing is perfect for the process to begin early in 2014 without any further delay.
>
>
> -----
>
> I can't take complete silence as consent.  silence only works as consent when other people are being noisy.
>
> so please say something
>
> avri