RE: [nc-intake] Melbourne

["Chicoine, Caroline G." <CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com>]

While I will not be there, I believe it would behoove us to have people
assigned to various topics, otherwise, I can imagine it will be very easy to
get off track and end up getting nothing accomplished.  Also, the sooner we
can assign stuff to people, the sooner they can disseminate info prior to
the meting so there are little surprises and the meeting runs smoothly.  The
IPC would be happy to speak on the UDRP review.

I personally think WGD needs to be finalized so that we can implement new
rules for WGs ASAP, taking into account the comments received from the DNSO
Review.  My understanding is that WGD is at a point at which it is ready to
submit its report.  I think we should get them to distribute it to us now,
and then once we have the public comments from the DNSO review, we can act
on the report and implement a new and improved WG process.  What do others
think

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul M. Kane [mailto:Paul.Kane@reacto.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 4:11 AM
To: Philip Sheppard
Cc: nc-intake@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [nc-intake] Melbourne


Last night, we also deferred two items WG D - final report, use for Review
process and next steps WG E next steps with final report
Are these to be Melboure issues or April ??

Is it proposed that the 8 items to be introduced by different people .. if
so
who will speak on each (group of) topics.

A reminder to ensure each constituency during (the F-2-F) previous day's
meetings receives a presentation from NC representaive(s) on the Business
Plan
and addresses any outstanding issue....

Paul

Philip Sheppard wrote:

> Paul and the IC,
> I believe the NC was Ok last night with the following agenda for
Melbourne.
> (Note the timeframe is too short to approve Feb 26 minutes. We can do that
> in April.) I see YJ suggestion re committee formation. I agree with this
and
> it is  covered by objective 6 of the business plan and under interim
> committees on the agenda.
> Philip.
>
> So let me know what the IC thinks of the following:
>
> 1. Approval of agenda
>
> 2. Business Plan
> - discussion of overall shape of plan a recommended by the Business Plan
> task force
> - discussion in detail of each of the 8 objectives and proposed strategies
> - prioritisation
> - implementation
> - formation of interim committees
>
> 3. Budget Committee
> - fund raising
> - search committee report
> - enforcement of dues
>
> 4. AOB