ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

Re: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process - DUE 17 DECEMBER

  • To: WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Bladel James <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process - DUE 17 DECEMBER
  • From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 15:09:30 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <17E55E24BE1F40CDB252F5CDBE79123B@WUKPC>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <17E55E24BE1F40CDB252F5CDBE79123B@WUKPC>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AQHRJqE36az+AQuO3kuB+bgAxbVAHJ6raGWA
  • Thread-topic: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process - DUE 17 DECEMBER
  • User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/

Not having seen any objections to going back to candidates seeking GNSO 
endorsement to request additional information concerning the GNSO criteria 
identified, staff will go ahead and request this information from those 
candidates so that the information is available for SG/C/Council to review by 
the 7 December document deadline. Of course, this should not impact your 
discussion on the questions outlined by Wolf-Ulrich below.

Best regards,


From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on 
behalf of WUKnoben 
Reply-To: WUKnoben 
Date: Tuesday 24 November 2015 04:13
To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Fw: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process 

Hi James,

by picking this up: could you please make reference to my email from 21 Nov 
with respect to the process? As time is short - and Thanksgiving is close - I 
wonder whether the council agrees to the process suggested.

I've already alerted the CSG and am confident to receive some input.

Best regards


From: Marika Konings<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 3:22 AM
To: Council<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process - 

For your information.

<soac-infoalert-bounces@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@xxxxxxxxx>> on 
behalf of Charla Shambley 
Date: Monday 23 November 2015 20:01
To: "'soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:'soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx>'" 
Cc: Eleeza Agopian <eleeza.agopian@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:eleeza.agopian@xxxxxxxxx>>, 
Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process - DUE 17 DECEMBER

Dear SO/AC leaders,

We are pleased to report that we received 72 applications from individuals 
interested in serving on the next review team under the Affirmation of 
Commitments (AoC) that will examine the impact of new gTLDS in the areas of 
competition, consumer trust and consumer choice (CCT).  Before final selection 
of the CCT Review Team is completed by the ICANN CEO and the GAC Chair,  we are 
seeking endorsements from any SO/AC for those 
applicants<https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct/applications> who 
have expressed an interest to serve as their representatives.

If you choose to endorse an applicant, please send your endorsements by email 
to reviews@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:reviews@xxxxxxxxx> by  the updated deadline of 17 
December at 23:59 UTC.

In order to help with the endorsement process, below are answers to some 
frequently asked questions:

Is there a set allocation for SO/AC representatives?  Under the AoC, there is 
no set allocation per SO/AC or per stakeholder group, nor is there a maximum 
for total size of the review team.

How Many Members Will be on the Review Team?  There is no set number of 
volunteers for the Review Team.  However, keep in mind that the review team 
should be comprised of members that collectively have  expertise covering the 
wide range of topics that are within the mandate of this review team.   Past 
AoC review teams were comprised of approximately 16 members.

What Were the Criteria for Applicants?  The call for 
 lists the criteria that we were looking for.  The composition should be based 
on several factors, including:

<!--[if !supportLists]-->·         <!--[endif]-->Subject matter expertise -

<!--[if !supportLists]-->o   <!--[endif]-->New gTLD application 

<!--[if !supportLists]-->o   <!--[endif]-->Intellectual Property

<!--[if !supportLists]-->o   <!--[endif]-->Security & Malicious Abuse of the DNS

<!--[if !supportLists]-->o   <!--[endif]-->Competition Issues

<!--[if !supportLists]-->o   <!--[endif]-->Consumer Protection

<!--[if !supportLists]-->o   <!--[endif]-->Public Policy Concerns

<!--[if !supportLists]-->o   <!--[endif]-->Trust in the DNS

<!--[if !supportLists]-->·         <!--[endif]-->Representation across the 
interested SO/ACs

<!--[if !supportLists]-->·         <!--[endif]-->Diversity

<!--[if !supportLists]-->·         <!--[endif]-->Regional representation

For more information, please see:  

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