<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process - DUE 17 DECEMBER
- To: "Marika Konings" <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "Bladel James" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process - DUE 17 DECEMBER
- From: "WUKnoben" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 21:15:15 +0100
- Cc: "GNSO Council List" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <D279D928.5328A%marika.konings@icann.org>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <17E55E24BE1F40CDB252F5CDBE79123B@WUKPC> <D279D928.5328A%marika.konings@icann.org>
- Reply-to: "WUKnoben" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks Marika, this is helpful.
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Marika Konings
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 4:09 PM
To: WUKnoben ; Bladel James
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process
- DUE 17 DECEMBER
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,
Marika
From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of WUKnoben
<wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday 24 November 2015 04:13
To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Fw: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process
- DUE 17 DECEMBER
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
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Marika Konings
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 3:22 AM
To: Council
Subject: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] CCT Review Team Endorsement Process -
DUE 17 DECEMBER
For your information.
From: <soac-infoalert-bounces@xxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Charla Shambley
<charla.shambley@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday 23 November 2015 20:01
To: "'soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx'" <soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Eleeza Agopian <eleeza.agopian@xxxxxxxxx>, Margie Milam
<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 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 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 volunteers 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
process/objections
<!--[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:
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-11-16-en.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|