RE: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

If I am crazy, just let me know, but I believe that for non-cross community 
working groups, when the GNSO specifically solicits feedback from other SOs and 
ACs, there should at least be some support within the GNSO for the underlying 
substance.  How awful would it be if the we solicited comments, the other SOs 
and ACs support the statements, but the GNSO in the end does not.  In that 
event, the work of the Working group never makes it out of the GNSO and the 
other SOs and ACs work on this is for not.

Again, the GNSO community does not have to agree with everything, but I believe 
should generally support the direction of the substance. 

Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs


-----Original Message-----
From: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:19 AM
To: Neuman, Jeff; Stéphane Van Gelder; Thomas Rickert
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: RE: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

Jeff,

I would not want the letter to be mis-interpreted.

I view it serving two specific purposes, both within the scope of a working 
group.  First, it is soliciting input from a legitimate part of ICANN which 
could, if it wanted to, offer such input without solicitation.  In the GNSO 
working group world, all are welcome, yes?  

Second, it is an offer of proof that the GNSO, its Council and the GAC have a 
mutual interest.

None of this is a bar to continued and vigorous Council debate.

Cheers,

John Berard
Founder
Credible Context
58 West Portal Avenue, #291
San Francisco, CA 94127
m: 415.845.4388



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, May 29, 2012 4:40 am
To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Rickert 
<rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I would actually like to see it discussed as part of the regular agenda rather 
than the consent agenda.  Not so much for the content of the wording of letter, 
but rather for the substance of the draft advice. 
The way it is portrayed in the letter, although it says that it needs approval 
from the GNSO, it implies that the advice does have at least some endorsement 
from the GNSO community.  Otherwise, why would we (the
GNSO) be soliciting feedback on it.  In my mind, there is a difference between 
putting something out for general comment through a public comment period vs. 
sending it directly to SOs for their view on the GNSO’s work product.  I know 
it is a subtlety, but the GNSO Council should be somewhat comfortable with the 
substance of the draft advice prior to directly soliciting other SOs and ACs 
views on the matter.
 
Can we get an update on the draft advice at our June 7th Council meeting and 
then decide how we want to position the letter?
 
Thanks.
 
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs



 
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 4:48 AM
To: Thomas Rickert
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in
Prague


 
Thanks Thomas.
 

So far, there has been no disagreement voiced on this list with sending
this letter. I can therefore confirm that I have put this on the consent
agenda for our June 7 meeting. I will be asking the Council to approve
my sending of the letter as proposed.

 

Thanks,

 

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France

----------------
Head of Domain Operations


Group NBT






 
Le 26 mai 2012 à 16:38, Thomas Rickert a écrit :




Forgot to copy the Council ....

=============
thomas-rickert.tel

+49.228.74.898.0



Anfang der weitergeleiteten E‑Mail:

Von: Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Datum: 26. Mai 2012 12:10:00 MESZ
An: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: Re: [council] Fwd: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in
Prague

I am fine with the letter. One question, though: Wouldn't it make sense
to put all the topics we would like to discuss in one letter or is this
a completely seperated matter?

 

Thanks,

Thomas

=============
thomas-rickert.tel

+49.228.74.898.0



Am 23.05.2012 um 16:31 schrieb Stéphane Van Gelder
<stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>:

As indicated in my previous email, please find attached my proposed
edits to the Consumer Metrics WG letter.
 

 


<Consumer Metrics GNSO to GAC.doc>

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France

----------------
Head of Domain Operations


Group NBT






 
Le 23 mai 2012 à 16:21, Stéphane Van Gelder a écrit :




Councillors,
 

Please see below and attached a letter that the Consumer Metrics WG is
suggesting I send as GNSO Chair to the GAC Chair.

 

I am adding this to our June 7 meeting as a consent agenda item so I
would appreciate if prior to that meeting, we have discussed on the list
so that we are all either comfortable with the text, or certain we do
not want to send the letter.

 

In order to get the discussion started, I have a few suggested edits to
this letter that I will send in a follow-up email.

 

Thanks,

 

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France

----------------
Head of Domain Operations


Group NBT






 
Début du message réexpédié :




De : Rosemary Sinclair <rosemary.sinclair@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Objet : RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

Date : 22 mai 2012 23:23:51 HAEC

À : Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>

Cc : "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Berry Cobb
<mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx"
<gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>

 
Hi Stephane

Here's my suggested note from you to GAC to encourage GAC to provide
early feedback to our Working Group on Consumer Metrics.

The WG is currently considering public comments received, including from
the US Government. We are working to have the work completed for
consideration in Prague.

This idea for specifically reaching out to GAC in this way came from
discussion with Bruce Tonkin about how best to engage GAC in this work
before we finalise the Draft Advice.

Cheers for now

Rosemary







Rosemary Sinclair | Director | External Relations
Australian School of Business | The University of New South Wales
Level 3, Building L5, UNSW Sydney 2052
Telephone: +61 (2) 9385 6228  | Fax +61 (2) 9385 5933 | Web:
www.asb.unsw.edu.au

________________________________________
From: Stéphane Van Gelder [stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 4:27 AM
To: Rosemary Sinclair
Cc: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Neuman, Jeff; Berry Cobb;
gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

Looking forward to your note on this Rosemary. Thanks.

Stéphane



Le 18 mai 2012 à 03:07, Rosemary Sinclair a écrit :



 
Hi all
 
I have action to write note to Stephane on this very topic of GNSO
reaching out to GAC on this work
 
Will circulate to our WG for discussion next Tues and then to Chair,
GNSO Council
 
Cheers
 
Rosemary
 
Rosemary Sinclair
Director, External Relations
Australian School of Business
UNSW
+61 413 734490
 
On 18/05/2012, at 4:43 AM, "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
<john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 
 
Jeff,
 
Berry may be able to phrase it more eloquently, but the matter of
Consumer Metrics ought to be on our agenda.
 
The Council should offer a report on the work so far in setting the
definitions and metrics for Consumer Confidence, Competition and Trust
that results from the requirements of the Affirmation of Commitments.
 
As you know, the GAC has a keen interest in this subject and it would be
useful to our working relationship to showcase the progress made.
 
Cheers,
 
John Berard
Founder
Credible Context
58 West Portal Avenue, #291
San Francisco, CA 94127
m: 415.845.4388
 
 
 
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, May 17, 2012 9:23 am
To: Berry Cobb <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
 
All,
 
I am responsible for collecting the list of topics to be discussed
during that session.  Can you please give me a one or two sentence
description of what you would like to discuss and how much time you
believe it will take?
 
Best regards,
 
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
 
 
 
 
From: owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Berry Cobb
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 11:46 AM
To: gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
Importance: High
 
 
 
Team,
 
It is confirmed that there will be a GNSO/GAC session in Prague.  There
is already an agenda forming and if we want Consumer Metrics topic on
the agenda, we need to expedite the request.
 
I also learned that the GAC has already contacted the GNSO stating their
interest on the Consumer Metrics topic.  However, John Berard, as our
Council Liaison, should send a note to the GNSO Council requesting this
be added to the proposed agenda.  The Council will have to agree that
this is a topic they wish to discuss.  I suspect it will be fairly easy
for the Council to approve this topic for the agenda.  The only concern
will be time allotted to discuss it.
 
John, can you send this notice to the Council ASAP?
 
Berry Cobb
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
720.839.5735
mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
@berrycobb
 
 
 
 




<GNSO to GAC CCI.doc>