Re: [gnso-idng] Proposed motion for letter on extended evaluation.
Hi, I have accepted Chucks edits and added Tim's recommended change. So does the mean we are done, at least for now, and that someone from the council will make/second the edited motion (attached)? If not, please let me know what else needs to be fixed. thanks a. Attachment:
idng-letter-motion-5-extended-eval.doc On 29 Apr 2010, at 18:42, Gomes, Chuck wrote: > > Good improvement Tim. I didn't like mine very much but had little time to > work on it. Thanks. > > Chuck > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx> > To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx <gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thu Apr 29 18:14:24 2010 > Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] Proposed motion for letter on extended evaluation. > > > The motion is fine and I am okay with Chuck's changes except I would > suggest that Chuck's wording in the first paragraph of the letter be > slightly modified as I propose below. See the text in between [[ and ]] > . It reads better to me. > > To: Kurt Pritz and members of the ICANN New GTLD Implementation Team, > CC: ICANN Board > > The GNSO Council requests a change to Module 2 of the Draft Applicant > Guidebook. Specifically, we request that the section on "Outcomes of > the String Similarity Review" be amended to allow applicants to request > Extended Review under [[ applicable terms similar ]] to those provided > for other issues such as "DNS Stability: String Review Procedure". We > further request that a section be added on String Similarity - Extended > Review that parallels other such sections in Module 2. > > Tim > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] Proposed motion for letter on extended > evaluation. > From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, April 29, 2010 3:57 pm > To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx> > > Well done Avri. Thanks. > > I made two very minor edits and two other edits that I think are needed. > They are highlighted in the attached file. > > Chuck > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria >> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 2:01 PM >> To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx >> Subject: [gnso-idng] Proposed motion for letter on extended >> evaluation. >> >> Hi, >> >> Following yesterday's meeting, where the 3 of us in >> attendance decided to propose a motion for a letter to be >> sent to the implementation team requesting the addition of an >> Extended Evaluation for strings that fail the Initial >> Evaluation, I volunteered to write up a draft of such a motion. >> >> I have attached that draft - which combines Chucks work with >> my original draft of a letter and hopefully also incorporates >> the sense of the WG relating to the extensive discussions on >> creation of a WG. >> >> As always, ready to edit till we get it right, >> >> a. >> >> > > >
|