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

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

We get to watch Marika at work on a 
teleconference, letting us see all of her 
secrets!  Hard to turn that down.  Alan
At 20/03/2015 07:22 PM, Marika Konings wrote:
> 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 
> <<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>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 
> > <<mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date:03/20/2015 5:55 PM (GMT-05:00)
> > To: "Gomes, Chuck" 
> > <<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, 
> > Greg Shatan <<mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Marika Konings 
> > <<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, 
> > <mailto:GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>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 wiseise to cancel it.
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > > From: Greg Shatan [ mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 3:56 PM
> > > To: Gomes, Chuck
> > > Cc: Alan Greenberg; Marika Konings; 
> > > <mailto:GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>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 
> > > <<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>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: 
> > > <mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>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: <mailto:GNSO-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>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