[gnso-osc-csg] RE: Comments on Actions/Summary

[Victoria McEvedy <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>]

WG,



As to Subtask 1.1 my only comments are to propose the following language:



2.f

IN THE CASE OF REJECTION OF AN APPLICATION OR A DISPUTE IN CONNECTION WITH AN 
APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT MAY LODGE A COMPLAINT WITH THE ICANN OMBUDSMAN. THE 
PROCESS FOR LODGING A COMPLAINT WITH THE OMBUDSMAN IS SET FORTH IN ARTICLE V OF 
THE ICANN BYLAWS AND IN THE OMBUDSMAN FRAMEWORK, AVAILABLE AT 
http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/documents/ombudsman-framework-26mar09-en.pdf.



3. PARA 2

IT IS RECOMMENDED GROUPS SHOULD FUNCTION ON THE GNSO WG MODEL FOR THE PURPOSES 
OF REACHING CONSENSUS AND THE USE OF VOTING SHOULD BE MINIMISED AS MUCH AS 
POSSIBLE.  (NB this was the original text which we agreed prior to Claudio's 
new version).



As to Subtask 1.2 -I have no comments as to the edits so far.



As to 1.5 -this is self explanatory and a formal, written and transparent 
method of communicating from Chair to Chair is recommended in future.



I regret I will not be able to attend the next call due to a conflicting 
hearing date. Please accept my apologies.



Regards,





Victoria McEvedy

Principal

McEvedys

Solicitors and Attorneys

cid:669FC637-760A-4D2F-B56E-2C180C1870CC



96 Westbourne Park Road

London

W2 5PL



T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122

F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721

M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169



www.mcevedy.eu

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972

This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the exclusive 
use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also be legally 
privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us know by reply 
immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without reading, copying 
or forwarding the contents.

This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer is 
created by this email communication.



From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: 05 February 2010 21:57
To: gnso-osc-csg
Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 05 February Meeting



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_group_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_stake_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.



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4839 (20100205) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com