+1 Nigel. It's either finaized or not. The co-chair states that it is finalized. So why the continuing discussion? /Stephen -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Nigel Roberts Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 5:32 PM To: Thomas Rickert <thomas@rickert.net> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Request for Clarification on Threshold Issue Then shouldn't we stop with the post facto relitigation? Or as our American colleagues put it: "Monday morning quarterbacking". On 29/02/16 21:58, Thomas Rickert wrote:
Hi Nigel.
"Does the Draft Final Report that was transmitted to the COs several days
ago accurately represent the agreed work product of the CCWG?"
That question has a binary answer.
The answer is yes.
Thomas
It seems to me that discussion continues on further modifications or amendment to it.
Is my understanding correct?
On 29/02/16 18:39, Salaets, Ken wrote:
r now, perhaps the previous vote should be revisited.
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community