RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 05 February Meeting

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

Fine with me.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Olga Cavalli
> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 3:39 PM
> To: Papac, Krista
> Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 05 February Meeting
> 
> 
> Dear Working Team,
> 
> We have a request from Krista about extending the revision 
> for one more week.
> What do others think?
> In the mean time, I suggest that we keep on with the revision 
> of the documents as agreed in the last conference call.
> Also remember our pending tasks:
> 
> Actions/Summary:
> 
> Task 1, Subtask 1
> 1. Work Team members are requested to review the text of Task 
> 1, Subtask 1 and provide final comments by Friday, 12 
> February. TO BE EXTENDED?
> 2. Claudio and other Work Team members will suggest alternate 
> language for Section 3 Policy and Consensus, Second Paragraph 
> and will post suggestions and comments to the email list.
> 3. Rafik will provide comments on Section 2f (language 
> suggested by ICANN Legal staff).
> 
> Task 1, Subtask 2
> 1. Victoria and Work Team members are requested to review 
> suggested changes to Task 1, Subtask 2.
> 2. Victoria is requested to clarify the meaning of Section 
> 1.5 Process Issues in comments on the list.
> 3. Work Team members asked Julie to confirm the citation for 
> the quote "unacceptably high information costs" in Section 
> 1.2 Improvements.
> Julie confirmed that the quote, as noted in Victoria's 
> original document, is from the LSE Report on page 9.
> 4. Work Team members asked Julie to confirm the link to the 
> "best and worst practices" document in Section 1.4 Methods. 
> Julie corrected the link and notes that the reference is to 
> the "Revised Constituency Analysis" document.
> 
> I will be travelling so I may not be able to lead the call, 
> in this case Michael will be charing it.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Olga
> 
> 
> 2010/2/8 Papac, Krista <Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Olga,
> >
> >
> >
> > Is it possible to extend the deadline by one Friday?  I 
> have been out 
> > of the office traveling to offsite meetings for the past 
> several weeks 
> > and will be back in Friday afternoon.  I don't know that I 
> will have 
> > time to review these changes by this Friday, but want to 
> make sure I 
> > do before we finalize them.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Krista
> >
> >
> >
> > Krista Papac
> > Sales Executive
> > Iron Mountain Digital
> > 5530 Bandini Blvd
> > Bell, CA  90201  US
> > Home Office: +1.714.846.8780
> > Mobile: +1.714.865.7655
> > Fax: +1.323.443.3573
> > krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > "Software Escrow for Dummies" - order your complimentary 
> copy today at 
> > www.ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies
> >
> >
> >
> > New Gartner Report: Successful Software Escrow Requires 
> Planning and 
> > Negotiation
> >
> > Gartner advises: "It is also important that the licensee 
> continue to 
> > track the software vendor's financials and viability 
> annually, because 
> > any signs of financial problems would justify the cost of 
> verification services."
> > Continue reading the full report at:
> > 
> http://www.gartner.com/technology/media-products/reprints/ironmountain
> > /170569.html
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx 
> > [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Olga Cavalli
> > Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 7:05 PM
> > To: Julie Hedlund
> > Cc: gnso-osc-csg
> > Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 05 February Meeting
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks Julie for this helpful summary.
> > For those not present in the call today, I encourage you to 
> review the 
> > changes and additions made to the text which can be easily 
> identified 
> > in the wiki, and send comments in our email list during this week.
> > If we do not hear any comment by next Friday before the 
> call, then we 
> > can consider these changes agreed by the working team.
> > As I said in the call I will do my best to join the call 
> next Friday, 
> > although I may be in a plane flying to Tokyo. In this case Michael 
> > will be charing the call.
> > Best regards
> > Olga
> >
> >
> > 2010/2/5 Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Dear Work Team members,
> >
> > Here are the actions/summary from today's meeting.  Please 
> note that 
> > our next meeting will be held next Friday, 12 February at 1300 
> > UTC/0500 PST/0800 EST and is scheduled for 90 minutes.  
> Note also that 
> > on today's call Work Team members discussed whether to keep 
> the same 
> > time, realizing that it is difficult for Chuck and Krista.  
> However, 
> > as the time accommodated most Work Team members' schedule, 
> it was decided to keep the same time slot.
> >
> > Note that the actions and summary also are included on our wiki at:
> > 
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.
> >  Changes to the Task 1, Subtask 1 document are included on 
> the wiki at:
> > 
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_stakeholder_grou
> > p_operations_work_team_task_1_subtask_1
> > and the Task 1, Subtask 2 document at:
> > 
> https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_and_stak
> e_holder_group_operations_work_team_task_1_subtask_2.
> >  Changes are shown in ALL CAPS and strikeout, as 
> appropriate.  Those 
> > that are suggested but not agreed are enclosed in curly brackets {}.
> >
> > Thank you very much and I hope you have a nice weekend.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Julie
> >
> > Actions/Summary:
> >
> > Task 1, Subtask 1
> > 1. Work Team members are requested to review the text of Task 1, 
> > Subtask 1 and provide final comments by Friday, 12 February.
> > 2. Claudio and other Work Team members will suggest 
> alternate language 
> > for Section 3 Policy and Consensus, Second Paragraph and will post 
> > suggestions and comments to the email list.
> > 3. Rafik will provide comments on Section 2f (language suggested by 
> > ICANN Legal staff).
> >
> > Task 1, Subtask 2
> > 1. Victoria and Work Team members are requested to review suggested 
> > changes to Task 1, Subtask 2.
> > 2. Victoria is requested to clarify the meaning of Section 
> 1.5 Process 
> > Issues in comments on the list.
> > 3. Work Team members asked Julie to confirm the citation 
> for the quote 
> > "unacceptably high information costs" in Section 1.2 Improvements. 
> > Julie confirmed that the quote, as noted in Victoria's original 
> > document, is from the LSE Report on page 9.
> > 4. Work Team members asked Julie to confirm the link to the 
> "best and 
> > worst practices" document in Section 1.4 Methods. Julie 
> corrected the 
> > link and notes that the reference is to the "Revised 
> Constituency Analysis" document.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > 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.
> 
>