<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: RES: [council] Final Working Group Work Team Report & Motion
Hi Jaimie,
Would you like to submit an amendment proposal to the motion that now includes
a mention of the need for a precis of the full report?
Thanks,
Stéphane
Le 11 janv. 2011 à 15:12, Jaime Wagner - PowerSelf a écrit :
> Jeff,
>
> Excuse me, but I think that if there is a simpler way, it should be the first
> one.
>
> I tend to redirect the WG team to come up with the simpler version upfront
> and not to accept a piece of work that would generate more work to the staff
> afterwards – that’s rework.
>
>
>
> Jaime Wagner
> jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Direto (51) 3219-5955 Cel (51) 8126-0916
> Geral (51) 3233-3551 DDG: 0800-703-6366
> www.powerself.com.br
>
> De: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Em
> nome de Neuman, Jeff
> Enviada em: segunda-feira, 10 de janeiro de 2011 14:32
> Para: Stéphane Van Gelder
> Cc: 'GNSO Council'
> Assunto: RE: [council] Final Working Group Work Team Report & Motion
>
> Stephane,
>
> I think you have some good points and I completely understand the notion of
> having too much to read for what seems like fairly simple concepts. The PPSC
> did not discuss this issue and I am not sure to what extent the WG-WT
> discussed.
>
> However, I believe that once the principles are approved by the Council, that
> we (the Council) can direct the staff to draft up a shorter summary (with
> encouragement to read the full report). I suppose the PPSC could review the
> summary to make sure it is in line with the final report. We could also when
> it comes time to approve the principles in our motion direct that staff hold
> a short session at the start of every Working Group to educate Working Group
> members on the basics for those interested.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have
> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination,
> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete
> the original message.
>
>
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 10:17 AM
> To: Neuman, Jeff
> Cc: 'GNSO Council'
> Subject: Re: [council] Final Working Group Work Team Report & Motion
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Because these WG guidelines are intended for use by WG members (see 1.3) I
> find it surprising that they would be expected to read a 35 page document in
> order to get a grasp on the way ICANN recommends they should set-up and run
> their WG.
>
> I do not find it realistic to expect volunteer members of a WG, not all of
> which would necessarily be very clued on up ICANN processes (nor should we
> expect them to be if we are to encourage broader community participation), to
> have to tackle such a report. As such, I fear that what we will end up seeing
> happening is that people do not read these guidelines and do not profit from
> them.
>
> With regards to this, has the idea of producing a one-page summary of the
> guidelines been discussed by the PPSC at all? The idea would be to have some
> kind of WG guideline "primer" which could help people understand what is
> expected of them as part of a GNSO WG.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stéphane
>
> Le 2 janv. 2011 à 03:53, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :
>
>
> All,
>
> Please find enclosed the Final Working Group Work Team report as approved by
> the Policy Process Steering Committee. I am also attaching for the
> Council’s review a redline of the report that compares the Final to the
> Interim Report that came out prior to the Brussels meeting. The changes
> reflect public comments to the Interim report plus changes made as a result
> of questions raised by the PPSC as addressed by the Working Group Work Team.
> All of the constituencies/Stakeholder Groups represented on the PPSC approved
> the final report with the exception of the Business Constituency, who did not
> vote. The ALAC representative, who does not officially get a vote, also
> expressed his approval of the report.
>
> A non-official informal poll was taken within the PPSC as to whether we
> should recommend to the Council that it put the final report out for public
> comment before review/approval given the changes that have been made since
> the last time the report was out for comment. The Registries, IPC and ISP
> representatives believe the GNSO Council should place the report out for
> comment; the Registrars did not think it was necessary, but did not object;
> the BC did not vote; and the NCSG opposed making this recommendation to the
> Council (believing that the Council should decide for itself what it wanted
> to do).
>
> The motion I present below acknowledges receipt of report and requests that
> the report go out for comment (should the council elect to put it out for
> comment).
>
> I would be happy to answer any questions.
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Motion to Acknowledge the Receipt of the GNSO Working Group Guidelines and
> Initiate a Public Comment Period
>
> WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see GNSO
> Council Improvements Implementation Plan;
> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-implementation-plan-16oct08.pdf)
> for implementing the various GNSO Improvements identified and approved by
> the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008
> (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182
> <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm>);
>
> WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two
> Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and thePolicy
> Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the efforts of
> five community work teams in developing specific recommendations to implement
> the improvements;
>
> WHEREAS, the PPSC established two work teams, including the Working Group
> Work Team (WG WT), which was chartered to develop a new GNSO Working Group
> Model that improves inclusiveness, improves effectiveness, and improves
> efficiency;
>
> WHEREAS, the WG WT completed its deliberations and forwarded the GNSO Working
> Group Guidelines to the PPSC on 1 November 2010;
>
> WHEREAS, the PPSC reviewed and approved the GNSO Working Group Guidelines on
> 20 December 2010 [includelink to GNSO Working Group Guidelines once posted]
> and forwarded the report to the GNSO Council on 30 December 2010;
>
> NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
>
> RESOLVED that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the GNSO Working Group
> Guidelines as delivered by the PPSC and directs ICANN Staff to commence a
> twenty-one (21) day public comment period on the GNSO Working Group
> Guidelines.
>
> RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the GNSO Working
> Group Guidelines as soon as possible after the end of the public comment
> period.
>
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
> Office: +1.571.434.5772 Mobile: +1.202.549.5079 Fax: +1.703.738.7965 /
> jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx / www.neustar.biz
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have
> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination,
> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete
> the original message.
>
> <GNSO WG Guidelines - FINAL - 10 December
> 2010.pdf><GNSO_WG_Guideline_Revised_Final_Redline_10 December 2010.doc>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|