Hi,

Understood.

Thanks.

Amr

On Feb 24, 2015, at 1:57 AM, Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> 
> On 24-Feb-15 21:29, Amr Elsadr wrote:
>> Thanks for following up on this. To be clear, the answers being solicited by the CWG-stewardship are meant to be provided by stakeholder groups, and not their representative members? If that is the case, then the NCSG Policy Committee will need to endorse the responses as NCSG input to the CWG.
> 
> Originally I had thought it was addressed to any individual.  At a certain point it became apparent that they wanted SG and Constituency level responses.  At our Singapore meeting we discussed sending a response - that is why i initiated the drive document and added some of the comments that had been expressed on the list.
> 
> avri
> 
> I