Hello All,

The word  Multi Stakeholder sounds great to me as it is a characterization of the group's composition. Can we consider the following?

Multi-Stakeholder Coordinating  Group on IANA Transition - MSCGIT  or  MCGIT
Multi-Stakeholder Coordinating Group on IANA Stewardship - MSCGIS or MCGIS

Mary Uduma





On Monday, July 14, 2014 7:15 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:


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