Re: [council] For your review - proposed transmittal letter GNSO Review WP Analysis

[Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Thanks for this. I will provide some additional input as instructed, which I 
will limit to the feedback received during last week’s webinar.

I have one suggestion as an addition to this letter —  something to indicate 
that the GNSO Council expects the dialogue between the GNSO and the Board’s OEC 
to continue, particularly in the event that the OEC should decide that it 
disagrees with any of the working party’s assessments.

This was a topic discussed during the NCSG meeting with the ICANN Board in 
Marrakech, and at the time, the indication was that the Board would be 
agreeable to discussing any areas of concern or disagreement before making any 
decisions.

Additionally, I have a question. The letter says:

> Additionally, this forthcoming work will require active participation from 
> the GNSO community and ultimately approval of the implementation plan by the 
> GNSO Council and the ICANN Board.


I didn’t think that this is the case, but would be glad to learn that I am 
wrong. My understanding is that the GNSO review was overseen by the Board, not 
the GNSO Council. Why would the Council’s approval of the implementation plan 
be required? I mean it would make sense that the GNSO is on board with the 
plan, seeing that it would need to participate in the actual implementation. 
Had the review been initiated by the GNSO, the role of the Council would likely 
have been very different. Since it wasn’t, I’m not sure whether or not the 
Council approval is required at any point. Am I mistaken?

Thanks.

Amr

> On Apr 21, 2016, at 4:45 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> Please find attached for your review, the proposed transmittal letter to the 
> Board’s Organisational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) concerning the adoption 
> by the GNSO Council of the GNSO Review Working Party’s Feasibility and 
> Prioritisation Analysis of the GNSO Review recommendations. As you will note, 
> placeholder language has been included to accommodate any additional comments 
> GNSO Council members may want to include concerning the feasibility and 
> priority of the GNSO Review recommendations, as discussed during the Council 
> meeting. 
> 
> If you want to add any comments in relation to the feasibility and 
> prioritisation of the recommendations, please provide those at the latest by 
> Friday 22 April. As noted during the Council meeting as well as pointed out 
> in the draft letter, the next phase of work will focus on the development of 
> the implementation plan so any comments related to that aspect of the process 
> should be reserved for the next phase. 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Marika
> <Transmittal letter - GNSO Review WP analysis - 20 April 2016.docx>