Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] FW: Draft call for sub-team volunteers message

["Gnosis IP Law, P.C." <gnosisiplaw@xxxxxxxxx>]

I agree there will be overlap, and if we only get the same 10 people working
on these it may make sense to combine.  However, if the focus of the
sub-teams is maintained in their responding to the specific questions before
them, then bringing their insight and suggestions together in the WG as a
whole will be more fruitful. The rationale for separation was to have
smaller groups focusing on the issues, defining them and preparing suggested
deliverables to present to the WG as a whole.  Obviously, if the active WG
is involved in each of these, or if the active group is small then combining
them might make sense.

If we combine them, however, I would suggest dealing with the specific
issues in the order of the sub-teams.

Michael R.

Notice: The material in this transmission may contain confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure or use of
this information by you is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
transmission in error, please delete it, destroy all copies and notify
Gnosis IP Law, P.C. <mgraham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  by return e-mail or by
telephone at (847) 997-4223. Thank you.

From:  Tom Barrett <tbarrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization:  EnCirca, Inc
Reply-To:  <tbarrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:  Wednesday, March 12, 2014 at 11:50 AM
To:  "'Gomes, Chuck'" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject:  RE: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] FW: Draft call for sub-team volunteers
message

Chuck,
 
My sense is that there is a lot of overlap between these three sub-teams.
This will lead to a lot of wasted discussion within each team about whether
an issue is within the scope of sub-team a or b  or c.
 
I think it would be more productive to simply attack these question with a
single team.
 
Best regards
 

 
 
Thomas Barrett
EnCirca, Inc.  ­ President
400 West Cummings Park, #1725
Woburn, MA US 01801
+1.781.942.9975 ext: 11
+1.781.823.8911 (fax)
+1.781.492.1315 (cell)
 

From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 5:03 PM
To: gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] FW: Draft call for sub-team volunteers message
Importance: High
 
Dear All,

 

Now that the working definitions and working principles have (nearly)
completed their work, it is time to start looking ahead and focus on the
next stage of our work plan. As you may recall, it was proposed that the
next phase of work would focus on the charter questions by forming three
sub-teams that would work in parallel in deliberating and developing initial
recommendations for the full WG to review. To refresh your memories about
the task and expected deliveries for each of these sub-teams, please find an
overview attached. 

 

In order to determine whether this approach is still viable and the most
efficient way for the WG to make headway on the charter questions, you are
invited to indicate your interest to volunteer for one or more of these
sub-teams. We have observed a recent drop in attendance of the WG meetings,
but we are hoping this is due to the pre-ICANN meeting workload and not a
sign of reduced interest. Please note that it is the expectation that each
sub-team would at a minimum meet every two weeks (in addition to the full WG
meeting every two weeks). The WG is expected to review the feedback received
and composition of sub-teams at its F2F meeting in Singapore to decide how
to proceed. 

 

Please indicate off-list to Marika (marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx), which
sub-team you would like to volunteer for:
* Sub team I (Develop criteria to determine when an issue, once identified
as "policy", may be appropriately addressed outside a formal PDP (e.g.
Through Policy Guidance) & Develop a process for addressing such issues
outside the formal PDP)
* Sub Team II ­ III (Develop criteria to determine when an action should be
addressed through a policy process (whether through a PDP or as Policy
Guidance) and when it should be considered implementation & Develop a
framework for discussing implementation issues associated with GNSO policy
recommendations)
* Sub-Team IV (Develop more explicit guidelines as to how GNSO
Implementation Review Teams (as defined in the GNSO PDP Manual) should
function and operate)
Thanks,
 
Chuck & J. Scott