Re: [wg-review] Names Council Meeting

["YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>]

Hello members,

Dany wrote:

> Perhaps our Chair or Council Liaison could provide us with an update
> regarding any decisions made relative to this Working Group that emerged
out
> of the Names Council meeting yesterday.

First, I wish I could deliver an agreed resolution among the relevant
parties to the WG-members before I deliver the position suggested
to the NC during the teleconference to avoid any further immature
disspointment or expectation within this group.

However, it is time to pass what has happened in the NC as NC Liaison
to this group and I hope NC members can reach some reasonable
proposal to WG-Review soon after this message.

1. During Feb. 8th's NC teleconference, when it comes to WG-Review,
    item agenda, the following suggestion made to the NC.

    "When NC presents DNSO review to the Board, it would be practical
    for NC to forward WG-Review paper rather than treating it as one of
    comments since this WG has been created by NC."

    "Even though from time to time there have been some drifting moments
    in this group however, many times they have been struggling to come
    up with their positions constructively."

2. There have been discussion among NC how to deal with this and finally
it was decided that this will be handled between Theresa and myself under
Philip's coordination.

3. As soon as the teleconference ended, I sent a message[Appendix 1] to
Philip asking for effective coordination between Theresa and myself.
However,
I could not hear from Philip of anything yet. As soon as there are some
substantial discussion among us, it will be delivered properly to this
group.

Thanks,
YJ

[Appendix 1] Communication with relevant NC member

From: "YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>
To: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:31 PM
Subject: Thank you, Philip.

> Hello Philip,
>
> Thank you for volunteering to bridge Theresa and myself
> to reach more constrctive communication in NC.
>
> As I said eariler it would be proper for WG to prepare its
> final recommendation asap to accommodate to the Board's
> process in Melbourne. I do admit it is going to be a still big
> burden for WG to do, though. On the other hand, NC is
> recommended to forward the paper to the Board.
>
> If it is needed as Erica and Caroline pointed out, NC can
> add its position to carry out NC's role that may be identical
> to NC review Task Force position to save time.
>
> I think this can be a compromise which will make everybody
> happy a bit.
>
> YJ
==========================================
                                [End of Message]

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html