ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[dssa]


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

Re: [dssa] i stole some of our stuff as rapporteur for the ISPCP comments on ICANN's SSR role and remit

  • To: Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal@xxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [dssa] i stole some of our stuff as rapporteur for the ISPCP comments on ICANN's SSR role and remit
  • From: Patrick Jones <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 06:03:18 -0700

Yes, in my mind this reply period really just makes it a 60 day comment period 
on the role & remit statement.

And there's certainly plenty of ideas in the ISPCP comment to consider with a 
reply comment.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:44 AM, "Don Blumenthal" <dblumenthal@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> The reply period is a new mechanism added at the beginning of the year as
> part of work to implement some of the ATRT recommendations (15-17?). I was
> part of the focus group that decided to complicate the process.
> 
> The period for comments is what it always was, and ends tomorrow in this
> case. The added reply period is for comments on the comments, and
> hopefully a bit of online discussion. With that out of the way, some folks
> have been known to use the reply slot as a de facto extension of the time
> to comment.
> 
> Don
> 
> On 6/15/12 8:26 AM, "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> ah ha!  i've caught me a live one.  somebody who actually knows what's
>> going on.
>> 
>> what *is* the "reply period" anyhow?  can you give us the quick and dirty
>> difference between comment-period and reply-period?
>> 
>> thanks,
>> 
>> mikey
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 15, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Patrick Jones wrote:
>> 
>>> Mikey,
>>> 
>>> The comment process is a bit confusing. With the reply period included,
>>> the actual deadline is 16 July, not tomorrow. But early comments are
>>> welcomed to drive discussion in Prague.
>>> 
>>> Patrick
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:19 AM, "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> i'd be curious to hear your reactions to the comments we, the GNSO
>>>> ISPCP constituency, just submitted in response to the request for
>>>> comments on the proposed SSR role and remit.  i "repurposed" some of
>>>> our cool ideas and drawings spiff them up a bit.  you can do that too
>>>> if you want -- that's why we published the Powerpoint file that has all
>>>> the pictures in it.
>>>> 
>>>> here's the link to the "comments received" page (do note how lonely
>>>> our response is at this moment -- ours is but one of two -- 'seems like
>>>> there should be more -- deadline is tomorrow).
>>>> 
>>>>  http://forum.icann.org/lists/draft-ssr-role-remit/
>>>> 
>>>> mikey
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>>> phone    651-647-6109
>>>> fax          866-280-2356
>>>> web    http://www.haven2.com
>>>> handle    OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,
>>>> Google, etc.)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> - - - - - - - - -
>> phone    651-647-6109
>> fax          866-280-2356
>> web    http://www.haven2.com
>> handle    OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google,
>> etc.)
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy