I have to disagree, as a non native this kind of language is, sorry for my openenss, confusing the heck out of me. I'd rather paint it black or white for clarity sake. In my mind there just is no such thing as unanimous support for parts of a recommendation. We either agree with it or not. In the case of working groups it is very clear that we do not agree. So why don't we just strike it from the list of agreed
recommendations?
 
tom

Von: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Avri Doria
Gesendet: Montag, 26. November 2007 21:26
An: Council GNSO
Betreff: Re: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform

hi,

seems simpler and more understandable.

while my tortured sense of logic was fine with the other, i see why this is more understandable especially since we then go and give our qualification.

thanks

a.

On 26 nov 2007, at 20.35, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

So we are sayiing "we unanimously partially support the recommendation"? Sounds a little confusing to me. At the same time, note that in my response to Philip just sent a couple minutes ago, I suggested "Qualified Support". I think it may be an improvement to say "we unanimously support a recommendation with qualifications".