Hi Milton, having just been nominated by the ALAC to the Coordination Grpup, I was late boarding the train on "naming the group". Your advice is to settle for CG "and not spend more time on this". But I want to take up your remark that "TFSI refer(s) to what we are supposed to facilitate, not to the group itself". I see this as an advantage: we would thus designate our target, rather than contemplate our navel. Jean-Jacques. Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> a écrit :
I think we're all getting way too cute with this. CG is fine. The list is already named that. Both TSIF and NXER refer to what we are supposed to facilitate but not to the group itself. Most everyone aware of us knows the context of the CG, so CG will do. Generally, I believe this is not something we should spend a lot more time on --MM
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg- bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jari Arkko Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 8:23 AM To: Narelle Clark Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Naming the group was RE: scheduling meetings
Something witty and catchy would be good - NXFER anyone?
I agree. That is pretty good.
I also liked TSIF.
Jari
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg