RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Public Comment For Review- Final Version

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I seriously think we need to discuss staff's role in supporting the GNSO.  I 
was under the apparently false impression that their role was to serve us, in 
other words respond to our direction as long as we do not violate the Bylaws. 
But even if we violated the Bylaws, they should never go against our direction 
before attempting to communicate with us.

Am I missing something here?

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-
> dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 6:47 AM
> To: 'Margie Milam'; 'gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx'
> Cc: 'Stéphane Van Gelder'
> Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Public Comment For Review- Final
> Version
> 
> 
> Just reread the last sentence....gotta love iPad's. It should say that
> the perception that neither the gnso council or "board" can act until
> the public comment period is over.
> 
> Sorry for the typo.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
> 
> 
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 06:44 AM Eastern Standard Time
> To:   'Margie Milam'; 'gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx'
> Cc:   'Stéphane Van Gelder'
> Subject:      RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Public Comment For Review-
> Final Version
> 
> 
> All,
> 
>  I just wanted everyone to know that despite the conversation on the
> list and the fact that i edited the
> comment period description to end the day before the Council meeting,
> ICANN staff decided to have the public comment period end March 23, and
> this new "reply period" to end on April 14th (2 days after the
> application window closes).  I wanted to bring this to everyone's
> attention because I fully expect Icann staff to defend their letter of
> the status quo for round 1 based solely on the fact that the public
> comment period ends after the window closes.  I am extremely
> disappointed In yet another attempt to circumvent our process and the
> work we are doing and would like to add this to the list of questions
> for Icann staff.  I also expect criticism from the community if we ask
> the gnso to act before the public comment period ends.  I have already
> have 2 reporters point this out to me and ask if that meant that the
> notion of changes were "killed".  (I did not respond).
> 
> I would like to ask for those dates to be revised so as to not create
> confusion or the perception that neither the gnso council or the
> stafford can act before the comment period is up.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
> 
> 
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 08:44 PM Eastern Standard Time
> To:   'Margie Milam'; 'gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx'
> Subject:      RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Public Comment For Review-
> Final Version
> 
> 
> Thanks Margie.  We really appreciate the quick turnaround,
> 
> 
> 
> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
> 
> 
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         Margie Milam [mailto:Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 05:40 PM Eastern Standard Time
> To:   gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject:      [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Public Comment For Review-  Final
> Version
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> 
> 
> I accepted Jeff’s revisions and caught a few typos.   The proposal is
> untouched, except to add a footnote with the date.
> 
> 
> 
> Since there don’t appear to be any more comments,  this will be
> forwarded for posting.
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> Margie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 1:32 PM
> To: Margie Milam; gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Draft Public Comment For Review
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for the delay, but this looks right to me.
> 
> 
> 
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
> the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
> and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient
> you have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately and delete the original message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-
> dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Margie Milam
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 2:32 PM
> To: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Public Comment For Review
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> 
> 
> Attached for your review is the DT Proposal to be posted with the
> Public Comment announcement discussed in below.   I have also attached
> a redline indicating the changes from the Status Report.
> 
> 
> 
> Please let me know ASAP if you have any suggested changes or revisions
> to this document.
> 
> 
> 
> All the best,
> 
> 
> 
> Margie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Margie Milam
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 12:03 PM
> To: 'gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: Draft Public Comment For Review
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> 
> 
> As discussed on today’s call, please find attached for your review the
> announcement of the opening of a public comment on the proposed
> solution. I will circulate the proposal document separately.
> 
> 
> 
> Please provide any comments ASAP.  I  plan to forward to the web admin
> team, per the DT’s instructions, this afternoon, at 4:00pm PST.
> 
> 
> 
> All the best,
> 
> 
> 
> Margie
> 
> 
>