RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Re: GNSO CSG WT next steps

["Michael Young" <myoung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,

 

Sorry for dropping off there a bit, but I am back and engaged.  My comments
on the final below:

 

 

 

The "gist" of any objection is interpretive and since I do not see any
guaranteed method of ensuring that "gist" is properly defined by anyone
other than the objector. I suggest we make the following change:

 

From

 

"In particular, the applicant shall be advised of the gist of any objection
to the application and be given the opportunity to REPLY WITH
CLARIFICATION."

 

To

 

"In particular, the applicant shall be advised of any objection to the
application, BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
OBJECTION, and be given the opportunity to REPLY TO THE OBJECTION WITH
CLARIFICATION."

 

 

 

Everything else I think is very well done.

 

 

 

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael Young

 

Vice-President,

Product Development

Afilias

O: +14166734109

C: +16472891220

 

From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: January-15-10 2:47 PM
To: gnso-osc-csg
Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] Re: GNSO CSG WT next steps

 

Dear Work Team members,

Per Olga's message below, the changes agreed to in today's meeting for the
Task 1, Subtask 1 document are entered into the wiki page at:
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_stakeholder_group_oper
ations_work_team_task_1_subtask_1.  Note that changes are indicated in
CAPITAL LETTERS, except in the case of the original paragraph Section 2i,
which was stricken and is indicated with strike-out marks.  I also have
entered Olga's notes and action items on our main wiki page at:
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.

I will indicate any suggested language received on the list in the document
by putting it in CAPITAL LETTERS and curly brackets {}.

Please let me know if you have any questions.  Thank you.

Best regards,

Julie


On 1/15/10 11:37 AM, "Olga Cavalli" <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,
thanks for the active participation today, we made very good progress.

We amost finished the revision of Subtask 1.1 draft document.

Proposed next steps are:

a- Section 1, paragraph b:
Victoria, Krista and Olga will elaborate a text based on our
discussion and will propose it to the group.

b- Section 2, paragraph d1:
Victoria and Claudio will elaborate a text based on our discussion and
will propose it to the group.

c- All changes made to the text will be incorporated to the wiki,
Julie will circulate the link to the working team.

e- For those not present in the call, please review the new version of
the tex and made comments as soon as possible.

f- The following text still needs to be reviewd by the whole working
team, I suggest that we exchange comments and suggested edits to this
part, which is the only text left to finish Subtask 1.1 draft document
revision:

............................................................................
............................................................................
.......
j. No legal or natural person shall be entitled to join more than one
Constituency or Stakeholder GROUP as a voting member.

Section 3. Policy and Consensus

All members of GROUPs shall be eligible to participate in the Policy
work of the GROUP and to join Committees formed to deal with policy
issues and other GROUP issues, including eligibility of membership in
the GROUP's committees.

GROUPs shall function on the GNSO WG model for the purpose of reaching
consensus and the use of voting should be minimized as much as
possible. 7
............................................................................
............................................................................
......

g- Next week there will be no support for conference calls, so next
meeting will take place on Friday 29 January.

I will welcome comments about making this call of one hour or two hours
long.
I am ok with both options.

Have a nice weekend, and thanks again for your participation.

Regards
Olga