NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Non-Commercial User Constituency <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Adopted Board Resolutions | Nairobi
From:
David Cake <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 13 Mar 2010 21:50:52 +0300
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Reply-To:
David Cake <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (12 lines) 
At 1:32 PM -0500 13/3/10, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>Wolfgang:
>The VI resolution was not a middle ground.

	The VI resolution was a sensible middle ground IF you believe 
that the board is genuinely waiting for the GNSO VI policy process, 
and is likely to accept its recommendations.. If you believe the 
board is paying lip service to the GNSO policy process, and intends 
to ultimately reject VI, then it is not.
	Regards
		David

ATOM RSS1 RSS2