[council] Fwd: Recommendations from the ALAC to the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) Working Group Chairs

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Councillors,

With Olivier's permission, please see email below from ALAC to JAS co-chairs.

Thanks,

Stéphane



Début du message réexpédié :

> De : Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>
> Date : 29 avril 2011 10:40:12 HAEC
> À : Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx>, Rafik Dammak 
> <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc : ALAC EXCOM <alac-excom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stéphane Van Gelder 
> <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>, ICANN AtLarge Staff 
> <staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx>
> Objet : Recommendations from the ALAC to the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) 
> Working Group Chairs
> 
> Dear JAS WG Co-Chairs,
>  
> As one of the two chartering AC/SOs of the JAS WG, the ALAC would like to 
> offer certain recommendations for your consideration, in order to boost the 
> WG’s efforts efficiently forward at this point.  It is the ALAC’s hope that 
> these recommendations will be taken in the spirit in which they are intended 
> – as guidance rooted in the shared goal of having the JAS WG fulfil its 
> mandate within the agreed timetable. 
>  
> The ALAC recommends that the JAS WG – starting with its conference call on 
> Friday, 29 April – thoroughly review the “JAS Issues and Recommendations” 
> summary document (located at 
> https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/JAS+Issues+and+Recommendations), 
> created by the JAS Drafting Team.   This document, once complete, will define 
> and summarize the JAS WG’s consensus on a select number of important 
> high-level issues, particularly: 
> Part 3: the required criteria of applicants qualifying for support (i.e. who 
> can qualify), bringing the element of formulation of these criteria from Part 
> 5 into this part; and
> To a lesser extent, Part 4: what these applicants can expect to get.
> These issues are covered by the parts on which the ALAC recommends the WG 
> most strongly focus. As per the WG's Charter, substantive outcome is sought 
> particularly in these issues.
>  
> The goal of this review would be to facilitate the JAS WG’s discussion – and 
> resolution – of those aspects of this document that are still incomplete or 
> for which there is still no clear WG consensus.  
> Please note that many of these unresolved issues are currently marked in red 
> within the document.  We believe that the needed agreement on this small 
> number of high-level issues can be reached without the WG’s also having to 
> agree, at this time, on the many underlying details it has been discussing. 
>  
> Specifically, the ALAC recommends that the JAS WG go about the review of this 
> document – and reaching agreement on the issues it covers – in the following 
> way:
>  
> This document review could be efficiently moderated by the JAS WG pen holder, 
> Evan Leibovitch.
> The document should be displayed in the meeting’s Adobe Connect Room so that 
> all members are, quite literally, on the same page.
> The changes on which the JAS WG agrees should be made to the document during 
> the discussion itself – that is, "in real time" during the WG’s meeting. 
> It is the ALAC’s hope that the JAS WG, by focusing its work in this way 
> immediately (as of its 29 April meeting), will be able to successfully reach 
> a consensus on a number of fundamental issues in the few meetings it still 
> has before the 6 May deadline for reporting on the time critical key issues 
> and its charters from GNSO and ALAC to be completed. 
>  
> I and other members of the ALAC Executive Committee would welcome the 
> opportunity to discuss these suggestions with you further.
>  
> Kind regards,
> 
> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
> ALAC Chair
>