RE: [sig-nir] RE: [sig-policy] Regarding the no consensus decision ofPRO

To: "'Anne Lord'" <anne at apnic dot net>
Subject: RE: [sig-nir] RE: [sig-policy] Regarding the no consensus decision ofPROP-028-v001
From: "Chanki Park" <ckp at nic dot or dot kr>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 16:35:04 +0900
Cc: sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net, sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
In-reply-to: <51E7BD3B-7145-4E2A-A952-3FE33EDD9603 at apnic dot net>
List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-nir>
List-help: <mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: "APNIC SIG for National Internet Registries \(NIRs\)" <sig-nir.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-nir@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>, <mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>, <mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Thread-index: AcX6Ln1y4a15j8dCSd+aERGCQHVORQACP+UA


Thank you for the information.

Regards,

Chanki 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anne Lord [mailto:anne at apnic dot net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 3:30 PM
> To: Chanki Park
> Cc: 'Philip Smith'; sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net; 
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> Subject: Re: [sig-nir] RE: [sig-policy] Regarding the no 
> consensus decision ofPROP-028-v001
> 
> Chanki
> 
> >
> > So my expectation was "A tie" or "can not decide"  instead of
> > "no consensus".
> > (This is the reason I call the chair's decision A MISTAKE)
> >
> 
> One important clarification. This is not a vote. Therefore a 
> "tie" or  
> "cannot decide" does not exist in the policy development process.  
> Both are states that indicate that there is no general consensus.
> 
> I hope this helps,
> 
> Anne
> --
>