I agree. After the 4th F2F meeting, it should be reflected as Full Consensus. From: RDS-WHOIS2-RT [mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlton Samuels Sent: Saturday, 2 February, 2019 7:45 AM To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Cc: RDS WHOIS2-RT List <rds-whois2-rt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Measurement of Consensus It should be repoeted as Full Consensus. Accentuate the positive! Carlton On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, 6:02 pm Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: In our draft report, for each recommendation, we reported "Level of Consensus" as "No objections". Shouldn't that be reported as "Full Consensus"? That states it in a positive instead of negative way, and is also what is specified in our Terms of Reference. Alan _______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org<mailto:RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt