RE: [gnso-osc-csg] GNSO CSG Meeting Tomorrow: 15 January 1400 UTC -- Comments Received

["Papac, Krista" <Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the recap Julie.

 

If I'm not mistaken and based on the MP3 from last week's call, the team
was only able to get through a portion of Subtask 1.1 recommendation so
we not only need to address the below open items from the portion
discussed, but also need to finish discussing the rest of the document.
If I am mistaken, can someone from the team please let me know.

 

Thanks!

Krista 

 

________________________________

From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 12:58 PM
To: gnso-osc-csg
Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] GNSO CSG Meeting Tomorrow: 15 January 1400 UTC
-- Comments Received

 

Dear Work Team members,

I have reviewed the comments received on the list in anticipation of our
call tomorrow to discuss Task 1, Subtask 1.  Note that this call is
scheduled for two hours in case we need the time.  Here are the
consolidated comments from the list.  Suggested changes to the text that
have been suggested, but not commented on by all Work Team members, are
included in the document on the wiki but in curly brackets {} as well as
in capital letters.  Please see the link at:
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_stakeholder_group_
operations_work_team_task_1_subtask_1.  For brief notes of our
discussion on 08 January see:
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.

If you have questions concerning the comments or if I have missed
anyone's comments, please let me know.  Thank you.

Best regards,

Julie

1.  Text Provided by Victoria on 08 January on Section 1, Item C -
appended text in curly brackets and all caps.

All GROUPs shall improve inclusiveness and representativeness and shall
explore the possibility to have differential fee structures based on
ability to pay , in order to encourage increased representation from
those living in less developed economies. {ALL GROUPS SHOULD HAVE A
MECHANISM FOR ANY POTENTIAL MEMBER TO APPLY FOR A HARDSHIP RELIEF FROM
THE NORMAL FEE SCALE}.

2.  Text Provided by Claudio on 09 January on Section 1, Item C - in
curly brackets and all caps.  

All GROUPs shall improve inclusiveness and representativeness and shall
explore the possibility to have differential fee structures based on
ability to pay, {OR HARDSHIP PROVISIONS}, in order to encourage
increased representation from those living in less developed economies.

3.  Additional comments on Claudio's text:  Victoria asked, "would that
then render it only an obligation to 'explore' having a hardship
provision --not a recommendation to have one?"  Tony and Krista
commented that they agreed with Claudio's suggested text.

4. Comments from Krista on 11 January:

*       Translation into other languages.  I still am unclear as to who
pays for the translation.  I checked the Toolkit document (Subtask 1.4)
and did not see where it provided for language translation.  If that is
the case, I think 1). It should be made clear in Subtask 1.1 if
translation is at the expense of the GROUP, and 2). If that is the case
I don't agree with Victoria's statement on the call that the costs of
translation is minimal.  Costs are relative and depending on the budget
of a GROUP this may not be feasible.   
*       Section 2b discussion regarding all GROUPs being open to
individuals - This provision does cannot apply to ALL GROUPs, and should
continue to state that GROUPs are open to individuals "as applicable".
In order to be a member of the RrSG, one must be business that is an
accredited registrar.  I believe this same requirement applies to the
RySG, ISPCPC, etc., not to mention future GROUPs which are currently
undefined.  I believe this is another example of a place where one size
does not fit all and we must be careful we don't try to make "it" fit. 

 



The information contained in this email message and its attachments
is intended
only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named
above, unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission
of email over the Internet
 is not a secure communications medium. If you are requesting or
have requested
the transmittal of personal data, as defined in applicable privacy
laws by means
 of email or in an attachment to email you must select a more
secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your
obligations to protect such personal data. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient and/or you have received this
email in error, you must take no action based on the information in
this email and you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
misuse, copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by email
and delete the original message.