[governance] Re: IGC questionnaire response to date: complete

[Ian Peter]

Sorry - in my rush I misread. If everybody is happy with non-binding I have
no objections


On 14/07/09 2:24 PM, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> On 14/07/2009, at 12:01 PM, Ian Peter wrote:
> 
>>> Although it may be
>>> palatable to all - change never is - the IGC contends that the IGF
>>> as a
>>> whole will suffer in the long term it does not prove its value to the
>>> international community by adopting mechanisms for the production of
>>> non-binding statements on Internet public policy issues.
>> 
>> NO I don't agree with the last sentence and believe it should be
>> removed.
>> Binding statements will reduce effective discussion to delegations
>> producing
>> monologues and lowest common denominator inputs. If everyone else
>> agrees
>> leave it in, but previously many of us have expressed reservations
>> about
>> proceeding in this direction
> 
> 
> 
> Ian, how do you interpret "non-binding" to mean "binding"?


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance