Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] P&I Survey

[Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I guess we slackers who are not slaving away on IANA have really no 
excuse, we will have to be there next week :-)
Don't kill yourselves folks, sounds like you are really working too hard...
cheers Stephanie

On 2015-03-20 19:51, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> Thanks Marika.
>
> Chuck
>
> *From:*Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 7:23 PM
> *To:* Gomes, Chuck
> *Cc:* Alan Greenberg; Greg Shatan; GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] P&I Survey
>
> For those that will be in Istanbul, which includes myself, we'll try 
> to arrange a meeting room so that those willing and available can take 
> the call together. And I'll make sure that the public comment review 
> tool is updated with Alan's responses.
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
>
> On 20 mrt. 2015, at 23:38, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> <mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>     Let's not resort to delays too quickly.
>
>     Chuck
>
>     Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>
>
>
>     -------- Original message --------
>     From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>>
>     Date:03/20/2015 5:55 PM (GMT-05:00)
>     To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>, Greg Shatan
>     <gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>>
>     Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>, GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
>     Subject: RE: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] P&I Survey
>
>     My schedule on Wednesday is not clear, so although I am officially
>     sending my regrets for the meeting, I may end up on the call.
>
>     That being said, this work we are doing will have a VERY
>     significant impact on gTLD future policies, and particularly any
>     new policy work done in preparation for a new round of gTLDs. As
>     important as it is to get our work done quickly and have a final
>     report published for possible GNSO and Board action, it is MORE
>     important that we do our work diligently and if that means a
>     delay, so be it.
>
>     Alan
>
>
>     At 20/03/2015 05:05 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>
>     Yes we do.  J. Scott is going to chair it because I will be in
>     route to Istanbul.  Avri and Allan may be in the same boat. 
>     Because of our need to review all of the comments, I don’t think
>     it is wise to cancel it.
>
>     Chuck
>
>     *From:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>]
>     *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 3:56 PM
>     *To:* Gomes, Chuck
>     *Cc:* Alan Greenberg; Marika Konings; GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
>     *Subject:* Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] P&I Survey
>
>     Do we have a meeting next week (March 25)?  If so, I will be in
>     Istanbul and probably unable to participate.
>
>     Greg
>
>     On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     One of the things we will need to do as we continue to work our
>     way through the public comments is to decide how best to cover
>     those that were submitted late for sections that we have already
>     covered.  Because we have only had one meeting to discuss the
>     comments, we probably won't have to back track much at this point
>
>     Will it be possible to get the comment review form updated before
>     the meeting next week?  If so, that will help a lot.
>
>     We only completed discussing comments on Section 3 (definitions)
>     of the survey in our meeting this past Wednesday so it will be
>     helpful if staff can identify any new input for section 3. 
>     Because section 3 is probably one of the easier ones, we may want
>     to discuss any new comments at the beginning of the 25 March
>     meeting before picking up where we left off in section 4.
>
>     Because the review form already has numbered rows that continue
>     across sections and because new comments will need to be added in
>     each section, I would like to suggest that we change the row
>     numbering scheme as follows to deal with these issues: format the
>     row numbers as "(section #) - (sequential row number starting with
>     1 for each section)".   For section 3, the row numbers would be
>     3-1, 3-2, 3-3, etc.  For section 4, 4-1, 4-2, 4-3, etc.
>
>     I am open to other ideas so please feel free to suggest them or to
>     modify my idea.
>
>     If there are other comments that need to be added to the form
>     after our 25 March meeting for sections we have already covered, I
>     am inclined to deal with them at the end rather than going back
>     each week.  But I open to other suggestions.
>
>     Chuck
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
>     [mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of Alan
>     Greenberg
>     Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 9:04 PM
>     To: Marika Konings
>     Cc: GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
>     Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] P&I Survey
>
>
>     Hi Marika,
>
>     Thanks for keeping the survey open. I have now completed it.
>     Although I didn't realize it at the time, it was quite possible to
>     include all of the comments that we submitted in our text comment
>     within the survey comments, so the survey is all that really needs
>     to be used by the WG.
>
>     Officially, I will be asking for a consensus call of the ALAC to
>     ratify this submission, but as it contains pretty much exactly
>     what we said in our text comment, I am not expecting any problems.
>
>     Alan