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

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Victoria
Regards
Olga

2010/2/10 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 *
>
> [image: 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 n*ext 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_1and
>  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
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4854 (20100210) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>