Re: [gnso-metrep-wg] another draft of the charter

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

hm…  good catch Thomas.

i'd be willing to debate the first one (the JIT education stuff) -- especially 
after a frustrating experience this morning trying to FIND some compliance 
related information on the ICANN web page.  i know Compliance has made great 
strides, because people have told me they have.  but i sure can't figure out 
what they're basing that impression on.  the only thing i could come up with is 
a Dashboard page that ends at 2011.  there's a server at compliance.icann.org 
-- but it times out.  so i think there's plenty of room for improvement in the 
delivery of Compliance information to the general public.

the second one is left over from the RAPWG Alumni report -- where we said that 
it would probably be a good idea to limit the scope of this experimental 
"non-PDP working group" to items within the remit of the GNSO this first time 
around.  that one i'll defend more stoutly.  :-)

m

On Dec 14, 2013, at 1:52 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Mikey and Other Members of the MetRep,
> 
> I'm a bit confused about one aspect of the In and Out of scope. When the In 
> Scope says:
> “Just in time education” describing reporting or action options that are 
> available when the person’s problem falls outside ICANN policy
> And the Out of Scope says:
> Metrics and reporting outside the scope of GNSO policy and ICANN contracts 
> with contracted parties
> It's a bit opaque to me. In the first instance it seem to say that for 
> problems outside ICANN's scope people are to be provided with "education."  
> But the Out of Scope says that, as these are "outside the scope of GNSO 
> policy," we don't count the instances.
> 
> Is this unclear to anyone else?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Tom Lowenhaupt
> 
> 
> On 12/14/2013 7:33 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>> hi all,
>> 
>> i seem to be constantly apologizing for how long it takes me to turn 
>> documents around.  i'm taking steps to remedy that problem by reducing 
>> lower-priority ICANN commitments, but the changes haven't quite "taken" yet.
>> 
>> anyway, here's a new version of the draft.  i took a look at the last draft 
>> and decided that the root cause of the trouble was the "Purpose" section 
>> that i lifted from the RAPWG alumni memo.  so i deleted it.  the puzzler 
>> i'll  present to you is to check to see if i threw out too much.  i don't 
>> think i have, but more eyes would help with that.  
>> 
>> mikey
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: 
>> OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
>> 
> 


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP 
(ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)