Re: [council] Council Way Forward on Accountability Proposal

["Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think this make sense.

I volunteer to help.

Keith



On Dec 20, 2015, at 10:31 AM, James M. Bladel 
<jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

Thanks, Phil.  And generally, I believe your message below captures the 
challenges we (and other SO/ACs) face when asked to provide feedback in a 
compressed time frame, that also happens to collide with year-end holidays.  My 
availability is similar to yours, NamesCon included,  and from talking with 
Marika I think we should expect reduced support from Staff as well.

Given that our call on 17 DEC ran fairly long and you & several others had to 
drop, I wanted to share the way we left things with Thomas Rickert regarding 
GNSO feedback on the CCWG’s latest draft:

  — The SGs and Cs in the GNSO Community were working to analyze the report and 
prepare their comments by the close of the comment period.
  — The GNSO, as a Chartering Organization of the CCWG, was unlikely to submit 
any formal comments by 21 DEC.
  — Several SGs and Cs within the GNSO Community would, however, submit their 
comments by Monday.
  — The GNSO would provide feedback/approval to the final report upon 
completion in January.

I propose that we draft a letter to the CCWG next week, reiterating that we 
would not weigh in as an SO, but instead link to comments submitted by SGs and 
Cs (target: 24 DEC).  And next, that we form a subteam (me and any other 
volunteers) to review submitted comments and draft a formal GNSO position for 
review by the Council (target: 7 JAN).

Thoughts/comments/volunteers?

Thanks—

J.



From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on 
behalf of Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Friday, December 18, 2015 at 9:49
To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [council] Council Way Forward on Accountability Proposal

Fellow Councilors – and especially James, Heather, and Donna:

As I had to leave yesterday’s extended Council call a few minutes before it 
concluded, I am wondering whether any structure/schedule was agreed to for our 
consideration of the 3rd CCWG-ACCT Proposal in our role as a Chartering 
Organization?

Will we be scheduling additional calls to consider key aspects of the Proposal, 
especially those that elicit comments expressing concern or suggesting 
modifications? How will we handle drafting of a Resolution expressing Council’s 
view on behalf of the GNSO? And what is our target date for reaching a final 
decision?

For the record, I am available and willing to participate in calls next week 
(suggesting that any such call be after 12/21 to allow time for review of 
submitted comments) and during the first week of January.

>From December 26-January 3rd I shall be on vacation and intend to unplug from 
>the grid to the maximum extent possible.

>From January 9-13 I and 900-plus other members of the domain community will be 
>attending NamesCon and I will have limited availability to join any call. I am 
>departing the conference in the middle of its last day so that I can 
>participate in the tentatively scheduled January 14th Council call.

Thanks and best regards,
Philip


Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey