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
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 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 https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
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
I agree. On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 8:23 AM SUN Lili <L.SUN@interpol.int> wrote:
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 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 https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
_______________________________________________ RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list RDS-WHOIS2-RT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
-- SY, Dmitry Belyavsky
participants (4)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Carlton Samuels -
Dmitry Belyavsky -
SUN Lili