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 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date:
Sat, 4 Feb 2012 18:54:49 -0500
Reply-To:
Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Questions/Options for Protection of IOC/Red Cross Names at Top Level
From:
Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (9 lines) 
On 4 Feb 2012, at 03:38, William Drake wrote:

> So returning to KK's original message, I am for  Option 1: Recommend no changes to Guidebook and reject GAC Proposal, with an objection on process and precedent grounds complimenting the substantive case.

In terms of changes to the Guidebook.

Except that I think changing the Guidebook now breaks the GNSO requirements for a stable and predictable process, I would favor changing the guidebook by eliminating the BoardStaff policy that it currently contains making an exception for the IOC/IFRC.

avri

ATOM RSS1 RSS2