<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-policyimpl-wg] RE: PI Initial Report - updated draft for today's meeting
- To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] RE: PI Initial Report - updated draft for today's meeting
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 14:59:47 +0000
So am I correct that we will be using Anne's version in our meeting today?
Chuck
From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 9:25 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Aikman-Scalese, Anne; gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: PI Initial Report - updated draft for today's meeting
Chuck,
Anne made her comments to the version I circulated this morning which
integrated yours as well as some staff comments received. However, I have
noticed that in the version that Anne circulated your comments are no longer
attributed, but they are still there.
Best regards,
Marika
From: <Gomes>, Chuck Gomes <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday 7 January 2015 15:22
To: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>>,
Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>,
"gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>"
<gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: PI Initial Report - updated draft for today's meeting
Marika,
I don't know which is easier, to integrate Anne's edits and comments into mine
or vice versa. Whatever, is it possible for someone to do that before our call
today?
BTW, I like Anne's suggestions for the Executive summary.
Chuck
From:
owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 8:34 AM
To: 'Marika Konings';
gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] RE: PI Initial Report - updated draft for today's
meeting
Thank you Marika. Certainly this report is quite comprehensive and I am sure
we all applaud you and others on staff for pulling this together in such a
timely fashion to keep us on target.
I made some proposed wording changes in the attached redline version of your
last draft. I also wanted to share some preliminary thoughts regarding points
I believe should be made in the Executive Summary as follows:
"History shows that important issues may arise during the implementation
process which are the subject of diverging opinions within the community and
which may or may not involve policy issues. After reviewing several past cases
of such issues which were resolved on an ad hoc basis, the WG concluded that
defining such issues as either "policy" or "implementation" was not as
important as developing standardised mechanisms for addressing such issues
smoothly and efficiently regardless of characterization. This is especially
true in situations where the issues that arise are time sensitive. In light of
ICANN's Core Value 4 in support of informed participation in all policy and
decision-making, the WG proposes three new standardised mechansims for GNSO
consideration of such issues."
I think it is very important that the WG stress its conclusion that the debate
over "is it policy or is it implementation" is a potentially endless and
unproductive debate. The focus must be on smooth and efficient resolution of
issues regardless of characterization.
Unfortunately, I have been called into a meeting that occurs at exactly the
same time as our WG call today and this cannot be avoided. Please accept my
apologies. I look forward to listening to the mp3 prior to next week's call.
Thank you,
Anne
[cid:image001.gif@01D02A42.A9275640]
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel
Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP |
One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
(T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725
AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx> |
www.LRRLaw.com<http://www.lrrlaw.com/>
From:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx]>On
Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 3:40 AM
To: gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] PI Initial Report - updated draft for today's
meeting
Dear All,
To date, I've received comments from Chuck and some of my colleagues that I've
integrated in the attached version. Please use this version if you have any
further edits / comments. Note, that I've already fixed some of the issues
identified as well as updated Annex F as I had used an outdated version.
To facilitate the WG's review later today, I've taken the liberty to highlight
those comments / edits in yellow that may benefit from further WG
consideration. All other edits appear to be clarifications / corrections that
probably do not warrant further discussion (if you think otherwise, please flag
any other items that you think need WG consideration).
Best regards,
Marika
________________________________
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message
or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender.
The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be
privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the
intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act, 18 U.S.C. ยง2510-2521.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|