[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-c] Ambler's take [was: Two Para etc, ]
You've lost it. This discussion serves no purpose. Have a nice day.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Brunner" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2000 12:44 PM
Subject: [wg-c] Ambler's take [was: Two Para etc, ]
> If you'll turn over my prior item of email and read the verso you'll find
> both the text you seek (modification of the Cooperative Agreement) and the
> authorizing legislation (transfer of the U.S. Department of Commerce to an
> Indian Nation to be designated by ICANN).
> These are sufficient to meet your stated objections, if you have any new
> ones, don't hesitate to let me know.
> Of course, you could have just said "IOD can't make (enough) money that
> so could you rephrase it so that (one or more of) "public resourse",
> registries", and "cost recovery" was marked "optional" or "optional at
> date subsequent to operation", but you are your own best judge of what is
> your best intersts.