Thanks Brian. I think that at least, we should try to decide on what positions we want and the process we will use. Although I appreciate the benefits of co-chairs, I personally favour a Chair and Vice-Chair, with the Chair working closely with the VC, but nevertheless taking responsibility for the overall process. It also sets a hierarchy in the time commitment which I think is important. Alan At 04/03/2013 12:05 PM, Brian Cute wrote:
Alan,
I hesitated to make any suggestions since I have put my name forward for consideration. However, there have been no suggestions so far so let me make a couple and see how the group reacts. With 4 members having submitted their respective names to date, we could simply hold a vote in Los Angeles to determine the Chair and Vice Chair, Co-Chairs or Chair and Alternate Chair positions. Clearly, it would be efficient to agree to the Chair structure prior to Los Angeles, if possible. Perhaps we should discuss this question via email now to see if we can reach a consensus?
Regards, Brian
On 3/4/13 11:36 AM, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
As others have expressed, I too am willing and interested in the vice-chair position, or for that matter, to serve the review team in any other way that I can.
We will be meeting in a week and a half. Are we planning to defer any discussion of how we come to closure on these positions until we meet?
Alan
_______________________________________________ atrt2 mailing list atrt2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2