Re: [gnso-frn-dt] i had a go at a revised draft of the report

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

nicely done Squishy!


On Jun 20, 2012, at 4:14 AM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:

> Just for the record
> 
> I support the edits and the approach
> 
> And Squishy is very happy to have been mentioned on an ICANN mailing list 
> https://twitter.com/mneylon/status/215346668659417088
> --
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
> http://www.blacknight.com/
> http://blog.blacknight.com/
> http://mneylon.tel/
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
> Locall: 1850 929 929
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
> -------------------------------
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: owner-gnso-frn-dt@xxxxxxxxx [owner-gnso-frn-dt@xxxxxxxxx] on behalf of 
> Mike O'Connor [mike@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 19 June 2012 21:03
> To: Marika Konings; gnso-frn-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-frn-dt] i had a go at a revised draft of the report
> 
> yep, works for me.
> 
> sorry about the sluggish reply.  note to self -- don't try to keep up with 
> two 20-something surveyors when they're tromping around in your woods putting 
> in survey markers.  i felt like Squishy at the end.
> 
> go for it Marika.  and many thanks.
> 
> mikey
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Marika Konings wrote:
> 
>> Mikey, are you also okay with this approach? If so, I'll go ahead and
>> check with the Council leadership whether there is any time available
>> during the weekend or on Wednesday.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Marika
>> 
>> On 19/06/12 17:37, "jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> -------- Original Message--------
>>> Subject:: Re: [gnso-frn-dt] i had a go at a revised draft of the report
>>> From: Paul Diaz &lt;pdiaz@xxxxxxx&gt;
>>> Date: Jun 19, 2012 10:24
>>> To:: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>,"gnso-frn-dt@xxxxxxxxx"
>>> <gnso-frn-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> 
>>> Great points, Marika.  Then I suggest we forgo the pubic comment review
>>> tool and present Marika's revised draft to the Council at the weekend
>>> session (if time permits) or the Wednesday open meeting.  Mikey, please
>>> be sure to sensitize the Council to the DT's scope limits and the need
>>> for careful chartering to address all of the relevant issues - if/when
>>> Council decides to initiate a formal PDP.
>>> 
>>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Marika Konings wrote:
>>> 
>>> Maybe just to clarify, the GNSO Council did request the DT at its last
>>> meeting to review the comments received, decide whether any changes should
>>> be made to its report as a result and report back accordingly to the GNSO
>>> Council. Obviously, it is up to the DT to decide how to do this, with or
>>> without a public comment review tool. With regard to a Council liaison, I
>>> don't believe there is one for this group, but when the report is
>>> delivered to the GNSO Council I would expect that the Chair of the DT is
>>> invited to present the report and provide any additional commentary, as
>>> necessary. If the DT is in agreement with the latest version of the
>>> report, you may even want to consider asking for some time on the GNSO
>>> Council schedule on the weekend or on the open meeting on Wednesday to
>>> explain the changes made (even if the Council may not be in a position yet
>>> to take a formal decision on the report and the recommendations).
>>> 
>>> With best regards,
>>> 
>>> Marika
>>> 
>>> On 19/06/12 16:34, "Paul Diaz" <pdiaz@xxxxxxx><mailto:pdiaz@xxxxxxx>>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I agree with Mikey.  We're just a DT, and are supposed to have a very
>>> narrow mandate.  While I commend efforts to make any policy work as
>>> accountable and transparent as possible, I think it sets a bad precedent
>>> to get ahead of the process with a public comment review tool.
>>> 
>>> I suggest that we submit Mikey's revised draft to the Council and note
>>> the comments received.  Council can then decide how to proceed.  Who is
>>> this DT's liaison to the Council?  If DT's don't have one, let's be sure
>>> to clearly communicate the limits we saw for ourselves, and make sure any
>>> PDP charter allows the WG to explore the issues raised.
>>> 
>>> Best, P
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 10:21 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> i have mixed views about the public-review tool.  we've already exceeded
>>> our charter with all those suggestions.  our solution to that was to go
>>> out for public comment so that the Council would have some reactions.
>>> but we're just a drafting team, not a PDP working group and i worry that
>>> we're sliding down a slippery slope.
>>> 
>>> i'd much rather get this back in the hands of the Council where it
>>> belongs and put us out of business.
>>> 
>>> i suppose one way to do that is not to change the report at all, tell the
>>> Council that the report plus comments on that report are now in their
>>> hands and it's up to them to make a decision.
>>> 
>>> mikey
>>> 
>>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Marika Konings wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Mikey,
>>> 
>>> Sorry for the delay. Please find attached a slightly revised version in
>>> which I've updated some of the sections to reflect the current state of
>>> the report as well as including the report of public comments as an Annex.
>>> With regard to your question, if/when the DT signs off on the revised
>>> draft, it will get submitted to the GNSO Council which will then need to
>>> decide how to proceed. One thing the DT may want to consider doing, in
>>> addition to the revisions in the report, is to create a public comment
>>> review tool in which a response is provided to each of the submissions so
>>> this can be included as an annex and shows that due consideration is given
>>> to all comments, even if not all have resulted in changes to the report.
>>> 
>>> With best regards,
>>> 
>>> Marika
>>> 
>>> On 18/06/12 16:23, "Mike O'Connor"
>>> <mike@xxxxxxxxxx><mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx><mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> hm.
>>> 
>>> the silence is "great job mikey"?  i'm thinking it would be nice to get
>>> this little one cleared off the plate fairly quickly -- Marika, what
>>> happens to a revised draft once we give it the nod?
>>> 
>>> mikey
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jun 16, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>>> 
>>> hi all,
>>> 
>>> 'seemed like scheduling and logistics got Too Hard.  it also seemed
>>> like the comments were pretty easy to accommodate.  so i just went ahead
>>> and cranked out a new draft.
>>> 
>>> it's unchanged until we get down to the "options" part at the end.
>>> there, i added one to add this to an upcoming WHOIS PDP with a "worthy
>>> of broader discussion by the Council but not our preferred approach"
>>> pretty much in line with our view on adding it to a PDP on the RAA.  i
>>> also refined the "launch a PDP on FRN" one that we had at the end based
>>> on the ALAC comments -- there, i made the "narrow" point more clear,
>>> added some benefits and bumped it up to that same "worthy of broader
>>> discussion but not our preferred approach" status.
>>> 
>>> so take a look at this draft and see what you think.  the substantive
>>> change is to agree on what our views are about those two additions, i
>>> think.
>>> 
>>> mikey
>>> 
>>> <FRN Rp1 - wComments v1 - 16 June 2012.doc>
>>> 
>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>> 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.)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> <Fake Renewal Notices - Updated Report - 19 June 2012.doc>
>>> 
>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>> phone 651-647-6109
>>> fax   866-280-2356
>>> web http://www.haven2.com
>>> handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google,
>>> etc.)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> <default.xml>
>> 
> 
> - - - - - - - - -
> 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.)