RES: [ispcp] RE: Constituency input to Board/GAC consultations

["Jaime Wagner - PowerSelf" <jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ICANN's mention as follows would satisfy your concerns?

Our constituency supports the continuous effort on the part of the ICANN
Board to accommodate GAC concerns. We welcome this collaboration at this
stage in proceedings, but we stress that once the Applicant Guidebook is
finalized, the process for determining the outcome of individual
applications should be conducted by ICANN in a neutral and objective way, in
accordance with the policy expressed in the Guidebook.

Jaime Wagner
jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Direto (51) 3219-5955  Cel (51) 8126-0916
Geral  (51) 3233-3551  DDG: 0800-703-6366
www.powerself.com.br


-----Mensagem original-----
De: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 16 de março de 2011 12:53
Para: jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
jillian.mertsch@xxxxxx; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Assunto: AW: [ispcp] RE: Constituency input to Board/GAC consultations

I could live with the amendment to the 3rd para.

Regarding 5th para amendments there is a slightly different perception of
"who is the master of the implementation process?".
Tony, can you suggest a more clear wording on this? I'm in support of the
original one.

Others?



Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Jaime Wagner - PowerSelf [mailto:jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 16. März 2011 12:33
An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
jillian.mertsch@xxxxxx; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: RES: [ispcp] RE: Constituency input to Board/GAC consultations

Dear all,

I made minor changes to the 3rd and 5th paragraphs. My suggestion:



"The ISPCP constituency appreciates the dedicated efforts taken by the Board
and the GAC to bring to a swift conclusion the definition of the final
Applicant Guidebook. We welcome the opportunity to submit the following
comments:

The ISPCP constituency has always supported the bottom-up multi-stakeholder
approach for the development of ICANN policy. This includes the important
role of government advice to the Board through the GAC on public policy. 

The ISPCP believes that for the Applicant Guidebook to command widespread
and lasting support it will be necessary for the policy it encapsulates to
be capable of being applied by ICANN in an objectively justifiable and
non-discriminatory manner, with clarity of meaning and predictability of
outcome both for applicants and for other affected parties.

We believe that this objective will be aided by drawing a clear distinction
between the development of policy and its execution. 

Our constituency supports the continuous effort on the part of the ICANN
Board to accommodate GAC concerns. We welcome this collaboration at this
stage in proceedings, but we stress that once the Applicant Guidebook is
finalized, the process for determining the outcome of individual
applications should be conducted in a neutral and objective way, in
accordance with the policy expressed in the Guidebook.

In addition we'd like to stress that the whole process should be concluded
as quickly and efficiently as possible.



Jaime Wagner
jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Direto (51) 3219-5955  Cel (51) 8126-0916
Geral  (51) 3233-3551  DDG: 0800-703-6366
www.powerself.com.br


-----Mensagem original-----
De: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Em nome
de KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 16 de março de 2011 12:10
Para: tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jillian.mertsch@xxxxxx; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Assunto: AW: [ispcp] RE: Constituency input to Board/GAC consultations

Tony,

How about this, including the last sentence?

BTW Kurt asked to provide written statements for posting rather than by
reading during the session. What's your thinking?




Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 16. März 2011 15:49
An: jillian.mertsch@xxxxxx; Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: RE: [ispcp] RE: Constituency input to Board/GAC consultations

All

Adding a brief line to include Jill's comment would seem to be a useful
addition. Otherwise this appears complete.

Thanks to all who contributed.

Tony

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of jillian.mertsch@xxxxxx
Sent: 16 March 2011 01:20
To: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ispcp] RE: Constituency input to Board/GAC consultations


Elegantly done.  I don't have any major changes to offer.  However, is it
worth adding a line calling for the whole process to be concluded as quickly
an efficiently as possible?

Best,
Jillian (Cocayne) Mertsch
VP, US Government Affairs
BT
Mobile: +1 202 281 4334
________________________________________
From: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx [KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 9:03 PM
To: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ispcp] Constituency input to Board/GAC consultations

All,

Following the ISPCP constituency meeting see attached a draft comment to be
delivered tomorrow morning to the public Board session on the applicant
guide book.

Please provide any comments/amendments you may find useful.
Deadline: WEDNESDAY, 08:00 a.m.
<<ISPCP comment.doc>>


Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich