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

[Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>]

Indeed!

On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>  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 <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 >
> Date:03/20/2015 5:55 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Greg Shatan <
> gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx >
> Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings@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 don̢۪t think it is wiseise to cancel it.
>
>
> Chuck
>
> *From:* Greg Shatan [ <gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>
> mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx <gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>]
> *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 3:56 PM
> *To:* Gomes, Chuck
> *Cc:* Alan Greenberg; Marika Konings; 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> 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 [
> <owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
> mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> <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
> 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
>
>
>
>