SSR2 update and proposed immediate action
Dear Council colleagues, I'm pleased to provide this update on SSR2 and a proposal for next steps. - The SO/AC Chairs met this morning and agreed to finalise the slate of members going forward on the RT by this Friday. - The group agreed that the additional potential member (as noted in our motion of February) from GNSO could join, along with a possible additional member from SSAC. - The GNSO's SSC made clear that the additional volunteer was qualified and first choice in the event of an opening; our motion 20180222-2 ( https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201802) states (note Resolved 5 bolded below): Resolved, 1. The GNSO Council nominates Rao Naveed bin Rais to replace James Gannon on the SSR2-RT. 2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the staff supporting the SSR2-RT as soon as possible. 3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the selected applicant that he has been chosen and that the GNSO Council expects that the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in his work on the SSR2-RT, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the SSR2-RT, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team Members. 4. The GNSO Council asks the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to the applicant who was not selected, thanking him for his continued interest. The response should also encourage him to follow the SSR2-RT work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions. 5. *If the Council is in a position to nominate an additional candidate for the SSR2-RT in the future, the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position, following the SSC's recommendation that he is also a strong and qualified candidate.* In light of the effort to finalise the slate by the end of this week, may I propose the following as an immediate next step - is it sufficient and acceptable that we interpret "the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position" as being satisfied by a call on the Council list for objections to adding Scott McCormick to be raised over a period of 48 hours or so, and at the same time Council leadership may contact Scott to determine whether he's still willing to be appointed to the RT? Please in the first instance respond with your thoughts on the proposed approach of call for objections, which proposal I make mindful that I would not like for GNSO to miss the Friday deadline and be the group that holds up the appointment of the facilitator (which won't take place until the slate is confirmed) and thus the re-start. Best wishes, Heather
Heather, Thanks for this. No objection on the proposed process. With a new seat, this way forward seems to be the spirit, if not the goal, of the “resolved 5” on the motion, so it’s a good thing to have seats for both given the recommendation from the standing selection committee. Regards, Philippe From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Heather Forrest Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 6:13 AM To: GNSO Council List Subject: [council] SSR2 update and proposed immediate action Dear Council colleagues, I'm pleased to provide this update on SSR2 and a proposal for next steps. · The SO/AC Chairs met this morning and agreed to finalise the slate of members going forward on the RT by this Friday. · The group agreed that the additional potential member (as noted in our motion of February) from GNSO could join, along with a possible additional member from SSAC. · The GNSO's SSC made clear that the additional volunteer was qualified and first choice in the event of an opening; our motion 20180222-2 (https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201802) states (note Resolved 5 bolded below): Resolved, 1. The GNSO Council nominates Rao Naveed bin Rais to replace James Gannon on the SSR2-RT. 2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the staff supporting the SSR2-RT as soon as possible. 3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the selected applicant that he has been chosen and that the GNSO Council expects that the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in his work on the SSR2-RT, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the SSR2-RT, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team Members. 4. The GNSO Council asks the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to the applicant who was not selected, thanking him for his continued interest. The response should also encourage him to follow the SSR2-RT work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions. 5. If the Council is in a position to nominate an additional candidate for the SSR2-RT in the future, the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position, following the SSC's recommendation that he is also a strong and qualified candidate. In light of the effort to finalise the slate by the end of this week, may I propose the following as an immediate next step - is it sufficient and acceptable that we interpret "the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position" as being satisfied by a call on the Council list for objections to adding Scott McCormick to be raised over a period of 48 hours or so, and at the same time Council leadership may contact Scott to determine whether he's still willing to be appointed to the RT? Please in the first instance respond with your thoughts on the proposed approach of call for objections, which proposal I make mindful that I would not like for GNSO to miss the Friday deadline and be the group that holds up the appointment of the facilitator (which won't take place until the slate is confirmed) and thus the re-start. Best wishes, Heather _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
Thanks very much, Philippe, for your input, which I interpret as support for a call for objections. Philippe's post is the only input received on this point. In the interests of meeting Friday's deadline, may I please make last call for (in particular, objections) to the idea of a call for objections as a means of Council's satisfying its February resolution on the appointment of additional SSR2 members, with any such intervention to be made in the next 24 hours. After that point, assuming we go ahead with call for any objections to Scott McCormick's appointment, we'll immediately turn to that call for objections, to end on Friday morning in the last timezone in which a Councillor ordinarily resides (ie, California USA). To recap and restate, as the above may not be 100% clear: - Call for objections 1: on whether a call for objections appropriately carries out Council's responsibility in considering the additional SSR2 member recommended by the SSC (objections deadline 24 hours from sending this email) - Call for objections 2: on the appointment of Scott McCormick as the GNSO's 4th SSR2-RT member (objections deadline Friday 0900 Los Angeles time Many thanks, Heather On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:04 AM, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Heather,
Thanks for this. No objection on the proposed process. With a new seat, this way forward seems to be the spirit, if not the goal, of the “resolved 5” on the motion, so it’s a good thing to have seats for both given the recommendation from the standing selection committee.
Regards,
Philippe
*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] *On Beha**lf Of *Heather Forrest *Sent:* Tuesday, April 10, 2018 6:13 AM *To:* GNSO Council List *Subject:* [council] SSR2 update and proposed immediate action
Dear Council colleagues,
I'm pleased to provide this update on SSR2 and a proposal for next steps.
· The SO/AC Chairs met this morning and agreed to finalise the slate of members going forward on the RT by this Friday.
· The group agreed that the additional potential member (as noted in our motion of February) from GNSO could join, along with a possible additional member from SSAC.
· The GNSO's SSC made clear that the additional volunteer was qualified and first choice in the event of an opening; our motion 20180222-2 ( https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201802) states (note Resolved 5 bolded below):
Resolved,
1. The GNSO Council nominates Rao Naveed bin Rais to replace James Gannon on the SSR2-RT.
2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the staff supporting the SSR2-RT as soon as possible.
3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the selected applicant that he has been chosen and that the GNSO Council expects that the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in his work on the SSR2-RT, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the SSR2-RT, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team Members.
4. The GNSO Council asks the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to the applicant who was not selected, thanking him for his continued interest. The response should also encourage him to follow the SSR2-RT work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions.
5. *If the Council is in a position to nominate an additional candidate for the SSR2-RT in the future, the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position, following the SSC's recommendation that he is also a strong and qualified candidate.*
In light of the effort to finalise the slate by the end of this week, may I propose the following as an immediate next step - is it sufficient and acceptable that we interpret "the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position" as being satisfied by a call on the Council list for objections to adding Scott McCormick to be raised over a period of 48 hours or so, and at the same time Council leadership may contact Scott to determine whether he's still willing to be appointed to the RT?
Please in the first instance respond with your thoughts on the proposed approach of call for objections, which proposal I make mindful that I would not like for GNSO to miss the Friday deadline and be the group that holds up the appointment of the facilitator (which won't take place until the slate is confirmed) and thus the re-start.
Best wishes,
Heather
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
Hi Heather, thanks for the reminder, I reiterate my support for the approach and I have no objection with regard to the 2 calls. Thanks again for the work done to liaise with SO/AC leaders on SSR2 and getting things moving. Best, Rafik 2018-04-11 12:16 GMT+09:00 Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>:
Thanks very much, Philippe, for your input, which I interpret as support for a call for objections. Philippe's post is the only input received on this point. In the interests of meeting Friday's deadline, may I please make last call for (in particular, objections) to the idea of a call for objections as a means of Council's satisfying its February resolution on the appointment of additional SSR2 members, with any such intervention to be made in the next 24 hours. After that point, assuming we go ahead with call for any objections to Scott McCormick's appointment, we'll immediately turn to that call for objections, to end on Friday morning in the last timezone in which a Councillor ordinarily resides (ie, California USA).
To recap and restate, as the above may not be 100% clear:
- Call for objections 1: on whether a call for objections appropriately carries out Council's responsibility in considering the additional SSR2 member recommended by the SSC (objections deadline 24 hours from sending this email) - Call for objections 2: on the appointment of Scott McCormick as the GNSO's 4th SSR2-RT member (objections deadline Friday 0900 Los Angeles time
Many thanks,
Heather
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:04 AM, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Heather,
Thanks for this. No objection on the proposed process. With a new seat, this way forward seems to be the spirit, if not the goal, of the “resolved 5” on the motion, so it’s a good thing to have seats for both given the recommendation from the standing selection committee.
Regards,
Philippe
*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] *On Beha**lf Of *Heather Forrest *Sent:* Tuesday, April 10, 2018 6:13 AM *To:* GNSO Council List *Subject:* [council] SSR2 update and proposed immediate action
Dear Council colleagues,
I'm pleased to provide this update on SSR2 and a proposal for next steps.
· The SO/AC Chairs met this morning and agreed to finalise the slate of members going forward on the RT by this Friday.
· The group agreed that the additional potential member (as noted in our motion of February) from GNSO could join, along with a possible additional member from SSAC.
· The GNSO's SSC made clear that the additional volunteer was qualified and first choice in the event of an opening; our motion 20180222-2 ( https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201802) states (note Resolved 5 bolded below):
Resolved,
1. The GNSO Council nominates Rao Naveed bin Rais to replace James Gannon on the SSR2-RT.
2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the staff supporting the SSR2-RT as soon as possible.
3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the selected applicant that he has been chosen and that the GNSO Council expects that the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in his work on the SSR2-RT, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the SSR2-RT, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team Members.
4. The GNSO Council asks the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to the applicant who was not selected, thanking him for his continued interest. The response should also encourage him to follow the SSR2-RT work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions.
5. *If the Council is in a position to nominate an additional candidate for the SSR2-RT in the future, the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position, following the SSC's recommendation that he is also a strong and qualified candidate.*
In light of the effort to finalise the slate by the end of this week, may I propose the following as an immediate next step - is it sufficient and acceptable that we interpret "the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position" as being satisfied by a call on the Council list for objections to adding Scott McCormick to be raised over a period of 48 hours or so, and at the same time Council leadership may contact Scott to determine whether he's still willing to be appointed to the RT?
Please in the first instance respond with your thoughts on the proposed approach of call for objections, which proposal I make mindful that I would not like for GNSO to miss the Friday deadline and be the group that holds up the appointment of the facilitator (which won't take place until the slate is confirmed) and thus the re-start.
Best wishes,
Heather
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
Hi Heather, I have no objections with regards to both calls. I support the move. Let's not miss the Friday deadline since we have a qualified individual willing (hoping he is available) to serve. Regards, Arsene ------------------------ **Arsène Tungali* <http://about.me/ArseneTungali>* Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international <http://www.rudiinternational.org>*, CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <https://www.smart-kitoko.com/>*, *Mabingwa Forum <http://www.mabingwa-forum.com>* Tel: +243 993810967 GPG: 523644A0 *Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo* 2015 Mandela Washington Felllow <http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.htm...> (YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil <http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/education-and-leadership-programme...> & Mexico <http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/education-and-leadership-programme...>) - AFRISIG 2016 <http://afrisig.org/afrisig-2016/class-of-2016/> - Blogger <http://tungali.blogspot.com> - ICANN's GNSO Council <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/gnso-council.htm> Member. AFRINIC Fellow ( Mauritius <http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1907-afrinic-25-fellowship-winners>)* - *IGFSA Member <http://www.igfsa.org/> - Internet Governance - Internet Freedom. Check the *2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC* report (English <http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=234>) and (French <http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=242>) 2018-04-11 15:29 GMT+02:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com>:
Hi Heather,
thanks for the reminder, I reiterate my support for the approach and I have no objection with regard to the 2 calls. Thanks again for the work done to liaise with SO/AC leaders on SSR2 and getting things moving.
Best,
Rafik
2018-04-11 12:16 GMT+09:00 Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>:
Thanks very much, Philippe, for your input, which I interpret as support for a call for objections. Philippe's post is the only input received on this point. In the interests of meeting Friday's deadline, may I please make last call for (in particular, objections) to the idea of a call for objections as a means of Council's satisfying its February resolution on the appointment of additional SSR2 members, with any such intervention to be made in the next 24 hours. After that point, assuming we go ahead with call for any objections to Scott McCormick's appointment, we'll immediately turn to that call for objections, to end on Friday morning in the last timezone in which a Councillor ordinarily resides (ie, California USA).
To recap and restate, as the above may not be 100% clear:
- Call for objections 1: on whether a call for objections appropriately carries out Council's responsibility in considering the additional SSR2 member recommended by the SSC (objections deadline 24 hours from sending this email) - Call for objections 2: on the appointment of Scott McCormick as the GNSO's 4th SSR2-RT member (objections deadline Friday 0900 Los Angeles time
Many thanks,
Heather
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:04 AM, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Heather,
Thanks for this. No objection on the proposed process. With a new seat, this way forward seems to be the spirit, if not the goal, of the “resolved 5” on the motion, so it’s a good thing to have seats for both given the recommendation from the standing selection committee.
Regards,
Philippe
*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] *On Beha**lf Of *Heather Forrest *Sent:* Tuesday, April 10, 2018 6:13 AM *To:* GNSO Council List *Subject:* [council] SSR2 update and proposed immediate action
Dear Council colleagues,
I'm pleased to provide this update on SSR2 and a proposal for next steps.
· The SO/AC Chairs met this morning and agreed to finalise the slate of members going forward on the RT by this Friday.
· The group agreed that the additional potential member (as noted in our motion of February) from GNSO could join, along with a possible additional member from SSAC.
· The GNSO's SSC made clear that the additional volunteer was qualified and first choice in the event of an opening; our motion 20180222-2 (https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201802) states (note Resolved 5 bolded below):
Resolved,
1. The GNSO Council nominates Rao Naveed bin Rais to replace James Gannon on the SSR2-RT.
2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the staff supporting the SSR2-RT as soon as possible.
3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the selected applicant that he has been chosen and that the GNSO Council expects that the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in his work on the SSR2-RT, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the SSR2-RT, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team Members.
4. The GNSO Council asks the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to the applicant who was not selected, thanking him for his continued interest. The response should also encourage him to follow the SSR2-RT work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions.
5. *If the Council is in a position to nominate an additional candidate for the SSR2-RT in the future, the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position, following the SSC's recommendation that he is also a strong and qualified candidate.*
In light of the effort to finalise the slate by the end of this week, may I propose the following as an immediate next step - is it sufficient and acceptable that we interpret "the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position" as being satisfied by a call on the Council list for objections to adding Scott McCormick to be raised over a period of 48 hours or so, and at the same time Council leadership may contact Scott to determine whether he's still willing to be appointed to the RT?
Please in the first instance respond with your thoughts on the proposed approach of call for objections, which proposal I make mindful that I would not like for GNSO to miss the Friday deadline and be the group that holds up the appointment of the facilitator (which won't take place until the slate is confirmed) and thus the re-start.
Best wishes,
Heather
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
Dear Council colleagues, Following up on the emails below, I have not seen any objection to either 1 or 2. I will contact Scott McCormick to notify him of Council's consideration of the matter and ask if he is willing to accept the appointment. Many thanks and best wishes, Heather On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks very much, Philippe, for your input, which I interpret as support for a call for objections. Philippe's post is the only input received on this point. In the interests of meeting Friday's deadline, may I please make last call for (in particular, objections) to the idea of a call for objections as a means of Council's satisfying its February resolution on the appointment of additional SSR2 members, with any such intervention to be made in the next 24 hours. After that point, assuming we go ahead with call for any objections to Scott McCormick's appointment, we'll immediately turn to that call for objections, to end on Friday morning in the last timezone in which a Councillor ordinarily resides (ie, California USA).
To recap and restate, as the above may not be 100% clear:
- Call for objections 1: on whether a call for objections appropriately carries out Council's responsibility in considering the additional SSR2 member recommended by the SSC (objections deadline 24 hours from sending this email) - Call for objections 2: on the appointment of Scott McCormick as the GNSO's 4th SSR2-RT member (objections deadline Friday 0900 Los Angeles time
Many thanks,
Heather
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:04 AM, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Heather,
Thanks for this. No objection on the proposed process. With a new seat, this way forward seems to be the spirit, if not the goal, of the “resolved 5” on the motion, so it’s a good thing to have seats for both given the recommendation from the standing selection committee.
Regards,
Philippe
*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] *On Beha**lf Of *Heather Forrest *Sent:* Tuesday, April 10, 2018 6:13 AM *To:* GNSO Council List *Subject:* [council] SSR2 update and proposed immediate action
Dear Council colleagues,
I'm pleased to provide this update on SSR2 and a proposal for next steps.
· The SO/AC Chairs met this morning and agreed to finalise the slate of members going forward on the RT by this Friday.
· The group agreed that the additional potential member (as noted in our motion of February) from GNSO could join, along with a possible additional member from SSAC.
· The GNSO's SSC made clear that the additional volunteer was qualified and first choice in the event of an opening; our motion 20180222-2 ( https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201802) states (note Resolved 5 bolded below):
Resolved,
1. The GNSO Council nominates Rao Naveed bin Rais to replace James Gannon on the SSR2-RT.
2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the staff supporting the SSR2-RT as soon as possible.
3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the selected applicant that he has been chosen and that the GNSO Council expects that the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in his work on the SSR2-RT, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the SSR2-RT, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team Members.
4. The GNSO Council asks the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to the applicant who was not selected, thanking him for his continued interest. The response should also encourage him to follow the SSR2-RT work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions.
5. *If the Council is in a position to nominate an additional candidate for the SSR2-RT in the future, the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position, following the SSC's recommendation that he is also a strong and qualified candidate.*
In light of the effort to finalise the slate by the end of this week, may I propose the following as an immediate next step - is it sufficient and acceptable that we interpret "the Council will consider Scott McCormick as a first choice for this position" as being satisfied by a call on the Council list for objections to adding Scott McCormick to be raised over a period of 48 hours or so, and at the same time Council leadership may contact Scott to determine whether he's still willing to be appointed to the RT?
Please in the first instance respond with your thoughts on the proposed approach of call for objections, which proposal I make mindful that I would not like for GNSO to miss the Friday deadline and be the group that holds up the appointment of the facilitator (which won't take place until the slate is confirmed) and thus the re-start.
Best wishes,
Heather
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
participants (4)
-
Arsène Tungali -
Heather Forrest -
philippe.fouquart＠orange.com -
Rafik Dammak