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