RE: Reminder: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - PI Draft Initial Report

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

It would be really helpful Michael if you could do it.  It would also be 
helpful if you identified any edits that we should discuss because they may be 
controversial; these are the ones that are most important for our meeting 
today.  The minor, noncontroversial edits should not need any discussion.

Chuck

From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:13 AM
To: Michael Graham (ELCA); gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Reminder: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - 
PI Draft Initial Report

Michael, unfortunately I will not have time to review these or add these to the 
latest version of our document prior to our meeting as I am in other meetings 
at the moment. Any chance you can add your 'controversial' items to the latest 
version attached so we can review these during the meeting?

Thanks,

Marika

From: "Michael Graham (ELCA)" 
<migraham@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:migraham@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday 14 January 2015 11:07
To: 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: Reminder: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - 
PI Draft Initial Report

Marika:

I realize late, but my English Teacher markup syndrome hit and I made a few 
(and only a few) word/grammatical changes in the attached. NOTE: some may be 
controversial as they remove "flag" language - but I presume you will get 
through these, too.

Michael R.

Michael R. Graham
Senior Corporate Counsel, Intellectual Property
Expedia Legal & Corporate Affairs
T +1 425.679.4330 | F +1 425.679.7251
M +1 425.241.1459
Expedia, Inc.
333 108th Avenue NE | Bellevue | WA 98004
MiGraham@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:MiGraham@xxxxxxxxxxx>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message may contain private, 
confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the intended 
recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this message by others is 
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please (i) contact 
the sender immediately; and (ii) permanently delete the original and any copies 
of the message including file attachments.  Thank you for your cooperation.


From: 
owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 11:34 AM
To: Marika Konings; 
gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Reminder: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - PI 
Draft Initial Report

Reminder - please send any further comments / edits by Tuesday 13 January at 
the latest.

Thanks,

Marika

From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thursday 8 January 2015 05:19
To: "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - PI Draft 
Initial Report

Dear All,

Following yesterday's meeting, please find attached a revised version of the 
Initial Report. Any additional issues for WG consideration need to be 
submittedby Tuesday 13 Januaryat the latest in order to be considered during 
next Wednesday's meeting which will be scheduled for 90 minutes (starting time 
19.30 UTC). To facilitate your review and discussion, please pay specific 
attention to the following edits / comments several of which have been 
highlighted in yellow in the document:

  *   Page 9 - definition of Bottom up in a GNSO PDP. The latest version of 
this definition reads: 'a fundamental principle of ICANN's participation and 
policy development decision-making process whereby policy and organisational 
decisions and analysis originating from Stakeholders who participate in the 
process to the Board. The process is designed to and will ideally provide the 
equal opportunity for participation from all Stakeholders as practical and 
possible'.
  *   Page 10 - new preliminary recommendation in relation to the policy & 
implementation principles
  *   Page 10-14 - proposed edits to the policy & implementation principles
  *   Page 15 - proposed definition of binding / non-binding
  *   Page 17 - does sufficient need further definition?
  *   Page 22 - should clarification be added that this is disagreements 
relating to policy/intent, rather than this person being expected to deal with 
all disagreements within the group?
  *   Page 25-26 - What process(es) is (are) to be used for addressing 
implementation / policy issues raised by the IRT (charter question 4) - please 
review the 'optional - not discussed by the WG yet' language
  *   Page 26 - What role does the Board play, if any, in addressing 
implementation concerns from the GNSO Council? - please review the 'optional - 
not discussed by the WG yet' language
  *   Page 81 - If the GNSO Council liaison makes the determination that there 
is consensus for such consideration, the following procedure applies: to be 
defined following WG agreement on the above Operating Principles. [Note, this 
could be updated to read 'to be defined following community input on the 
proposed operating principles'?]

If there are any other edits / comments you spot that you believe warrant 
further WG discussion, please share those with the list. As mentioned 
yesterday, due to the merger of different versions the attribution of certain 
comments / edits may have gotten lost or may have been wrongly attributed to 
me. Also, on page 22 it looks like edits were made on the same places by 
different people - I've tried to fix these as best as I could. If you still 
have further edits / suggestions, let me know. Please also find some notes from 
yesterday's meeting below.

Best regards,

Marika

Notes 7/1 Meeting:

Public Comment Process:

  *   Design it in a way that assist the WG to more readily review and analyse 
the comments
  *   Asking for feedback in a questionnaire format (multiple choice or rating 
scale answers)
  *   This would be in addition to the 'normal' public comment forum. Consider 
providing a template that can be used to submit comments.
  *   Staff to put together a draft survey for WG review

Next steps

  *   For next meeting: circulate revised version, call out 'yelllow' items
  *   Any other 'yellow' items that require WG review / discussion need to be 
submitted by Tuesday 13 January at the latest
  *   Next week's meeting will start at 19.30 UTC and run for 90 minutes.