Agreed. All good points and angles. On 09/03/2011 3:37 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Perfect! > >> -----Original Message----- >> >> I tried to synthesize what was said and came up with the following (ok, I >> added some of my own content too). I have sent them to Diane with an >> apology for being a day late. Thanks to those who commented. >> >> 1. We would like to better understand how the Board weighs GAC advice in >> relation to GNSO recommendations, the CWG work and community >> comment on the implementation in the by-laws mandated process. Of >> special interest are issues related to MAPO/Rec6 and Community Objections. >> >> 2. We would be very interested to hear how the the Board reads both the >> substance and process of Cross-Community WGs and the JAS group in >> particular to understand what the Board is thinking viable supports might be >> and how they regard the recommendations for fee reductions. >> >> 3. While understanding that the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter is waiting >> on the approval of the standardized New Constituency process >> recommended by the Structural Improvements Committee, we would like to >> understand what issues, if any, may be blocking Board approval of both the >> New Constituency Process and the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter. >> >> a.