In addition to Adam's suggestion (extract below), how would folks feel about adding something along the lines of "It is also important to bear in mind that these communications should complement, and not substitute for, direct public engagement with the ICANN Board." Please note that comments can be submitted only up till 11.59 tonight (I am assuming this is either PST or EST - can anyone confirm it?) Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: [log in to unmask] Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 >>> Adam Peake <[log in to unmask]> 2/4/2009 11:57 AM >>> Important that the person asking has the opportunity to agree to having their question taken in that way. Perhaps add a sentence so the relevant part reads: It is also noted that ICANN staff, under direction of the Chairman, allowed for questions to be posted after the Meeting and subsequently answered by appropriate staff. The GNSO Council applauds this innovation particularly with the staff providing responses to direct questions. *However, questions should only be deferred in this way with the agreement of the person asking the question during the open forum.* Make sense? Adam