Joop Teernstra a �crit: > > Even in Singapore the critical meetings on the DNSO application and the > ICANN membership are scheduled on THE SAME DAY in different locations. > > Supporters of the principles of the Paris Draft, who also want to have > input in the ICANN membership meeting will be divided and conquered. Yes, the scheduling is atrocious. The principle DNSO meeting is being held on the same day as the open ICANN Membership Advisory Committee meeting. Frankly, I don't see how this can be allowed to occur. What's more, it seems that a high fee (US$50/day) is to be charged for each meeting. This will mean that those of us who are involved in both DNSO issues and ICANN matters will have to pay US$100/day at Singapore. Is this necessary? Is it right? Is it in keeping with the non-profit nature of these entities?
- [IFWP] A slightly different pe... Dan Steinberg
- Re: [IFWP] A slightly differen... Michael Sondow
- Re: [IFWP] A slightly differen... Dan Steinberg
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Einar Stefferud
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Jay Fenello
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Jim Fleming
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Ellen Rony
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Joop Teernstra
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Michael Sondow
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Ellen Rony
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline jeff Williams
- RE: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Ivan Pope
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Richard J. Sexton
- RE: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Roberto Gaetano
- RE: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Joop Teernstra
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Ken Stubbs
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Esther Dyson
- Re: [IFWP] ICANN comments deadline Bob Allisat
