ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter Drafting Team


Sure.  I think estimates are fine as long as they are not rigid.  That is why 
the PDP times didn't work.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Adrian Kinderis [mailto:adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 5:59 PM
        To: Gomes, Chuck; Mary Wong; William Drake
        Cc: GNSO Council List; Glen@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter 
Drafting Team
        
        

        No they aren't sufficient.

        We are looking for an efficient process.

        Can't we just estimate some turnaround times on all the tasks?

         

        Adrian Kinderis
        
        

        From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Wednesday, 3 February 2010 9:54 AM
        To: Adrian Kinderis; Mary Wong; William Drake
        Cc: GNSO Council List; Glen@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter 
Drafting Team

         

        Adrian,

         

        Are the milestones in the current PDP sufficient?  They have rarely if 
ever worked but if setting milestones is the goal, we already have them.  
Unfortunately though, we moved beyond the process in the PDP several years ago.

         

        Chuck

                 

                
________________________________


                From: Adrian Kinderis [mailto:adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 5:01 PM
                To: Gomes, Chuck; Mary Wong; William Drake
                Cc: GNSO Council List; Glen@xxxxxxxxx
                Subject: RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP 
Charter Drafting Team

                Whilst I agree it would be difficult to perfectly predict the 
final PDP date, I believe it is imperative that strict milestones be set and 
aimed for.

                These milestones should be drafted and included in the charter.

                 

                Adrian Kinderis

                 

                From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: Wednesday, 3 February 2010 12:49 AM
                To: Adrian Kinderis; Mary Wong; William Drake
                Cc: GNSO Council List; Glen@xxxxxxxxx
                Subject: RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP 
Charter Drafting Team

                 

                Adrian,

                 

                As you noted, the motion directs the DT to deliver a proposed 
charter within 30 days from the date of the motion; that translates to 27 Feb.

                 

                The next Council meeting after that is the one on 10 March in 
Nairobi.  The 27 Feb completion date will meet the 8 day requirement for 
motions, so the Council agenda for the 10 Mar meeting will include discussion 
and approval of the charter.

                 

                So there are two firm dates: 1) Proposed charter sent to 
Council not later than 27 Feb; 2) Council action on charter on 10 Mar.

                 

                I would expect that the proposed charter will include suggested 
timeframes for the other milestones that you suggest.  But I would expect that 
it will be very difficult to set a final PDP date.  To try to do that would put 
us into the same situation that the unrealistic time requirements in the 
current PDP does.  But I will leave that to the Charter DT.

                 

                Chuck

                         

                        
________________________________


                        From: Adrian Kinderis 
[mailto:adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
                        Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 2:27 AM
                        To: Mary Wong; William Drake; Gomes, Chuck
                        Cc: GNSO Council List; Glen@xxxxxxxxx
                        Subject: RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical 
Integration PDP Charter Drafting Team

                        Chuck et al,

                        Can we get a few milestone dates attached to this 
process from a 'delivering on time' point of view?

                        Perhaps something like (and this is very crude and for 
illustration purposes only);

                        ·         Charter Drafting Team nominations close 
(xx/xx)

                        ·         Charter Drafted (yy/yy)

                        ·         PDP Process 1 Starts (zz/zz)

                        ·         PDP Process 1 Completed (aa/aa)

                        ·         Final PDP Presented to GNSO Council (bb/bb)

                        Even if this is just draft it would provide a timeline 
for the work to be completed.

                        I believe, given the importance of this task, and the 
fact that a 'due date' was thought important enough to be included in the 
motion, we should put something in place ASAP. Without it, we could potentially 
be doomed to 'phaffing about' without direction. 

                        Thoughts?

                        Adrian Kinderis

                         

                        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mary Wong
                        Sent: Tuesday, 2 February 2010 9:19 AM
                        To: William Drake; Chuck Gomes
                        Cc: GNSO Council List; Glen@xxxxxxxxx
                        Subject: RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical 
Integration PDP Charter Drafting Team

                         

                        Thanks to Liz and Chuck for their clarifications and 
suggestions.

                         

                        I agree that the DT should be reasonably small, and 
would in this case personally prefer not to set numbers for each SG/SO/AC, or 
worry about matching/equivalence. In other situations and over other issues, 
equal representation of each group may be a fundamental concern, but in this 
case I believe NCSG is recommending Avri and Milton not because we believe we 
(or everyone) needs at least two (or however many) representatives. Rather, and 
for the reasons that Bill has stated, Avri and Milton will best represent NCSG 
in terms of what is likely to be a difficult preliminary issue (i.e. scoping 
out the WG). 

                         

                        Cheers

                        Mary

                         

                         

                         

                        Mary W S Wong

                        Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs

                        Franklin Pierce Law Center

                        Two White Street

                        Concord, NH 03301

                        USA

                        Email: mwong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

                        Phone: 1-603-513-5143

                        Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php

                        Selected writings available on the Social Science 
Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584

                        
                        
                        >>> 

From: 

"Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

To:

"William Drake" <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

CC:

Glen de Saint Géry<Glen@xxxxxxxxx>, "GNSO Council List" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: 

2/1/2010 4:33 PM

Subject: 

RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter Drafting Team

I wouldn't see any problem with that.  I just think it would be best to keep it 
as small as reasonably possible because of the short timeframe and limited 
task.  If the CSG wants three to cover three constituencies, would you want 
three?  (BTW, they have not asked for three.)

 

Chuck

         

        
________________________________


        From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 4:28 PM
        To: Gomes, Chuck
        Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; GNSO Council List
        Subject: Re: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter 
Drafting Team

        Chuck, 

         

        Two.  There are some fundamental issues in the air about the proper 
scope and terms of reference for the WG that need to be sorted out by the DT.  
Even if NCSG were to resolve its internal differences on these points, there 
would probably still be differences between the houses once the discussion gets 
to specifics. We're dealing with a rather variable geometry of perspectives, 
and as I say both people mentioned will add to working these things through.

         

        Best,

         

        Bill

         

        On Feb 1, 2010, at 10:09 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

         

        Bill,

         

        How many do you think the NCSG needs for the charter drafting team, not 
for the WG.

         

        Chuck

                 

                
________________________________


                From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 3:59 PM
                To: Gomes, Chuck
                Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; GNSO Council List
                Subject: Re: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP 
Charter Drafting Team

                Hi 

                 

                And from NCSG, Avri Doria and Milton Mueller.  

                 

                One participant from each SG would not work for NCSG, as we 
have a couple of contending perspectives in play, with multiple members aligned 
with each.  Avri and Milton have been very active and thoughtful proponents of 
those respective perspectives, both of which overlap/synergize in some ways 
with the positions advanced by other SGs.  Should be an interesting 
discussion...

                 

                Best,

                 

                Bill

                 

                 

                On Feb 1, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

                 

                Glen,

                 

                Please add Brian Cute from Afilias to this DT.

                 

                Thanks, Chuck

                 

                 

         

        ***********************************************************
        William J. Drake
        Senior Associate
        Centre for International Governance
        Graduate Institute of International and
         Development Studies
        Geneva, Switzerland
        william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
        ***********************************************************

                         



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>