Agreed. All good points and angles.


On 09/03/2011 3:37 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Perfect!
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> I tried to synthesize what was said and came up with the following (ok, I
>> added some of my own content too). I have sent them to Diane with an
>> apology for being a day late.  Thanks to those who commented.
>>
>> 1. We would like to better understand how the Board weighs GAC advice in
>> relation to  GNSO recommendations, the CWG work and community
>> comment on the implementation in the by-laws mandated process.  Of
>> special interest are issues related to MAPO/Rec6 and Community Objections.
>>
>> 2.  We would be very interested to hear how the the Board reads both the
>> substance and process of Cross-Community WGs and the JAS group in
>> particular to understand what the Board is  thinking viable supports might be
>> and how they regard the recommendations for fee reductions.
>>
>> 3. While understanding that the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter is waiting
>> on the approval of the standardized New  Constituency process
>> recommended by the Structural Improvements Committee, we would like to
>> understand what issues, if any, may be blocking Board approval of both the
>> New Constituency Process and the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter.
>>
>> a.