RE: [gnso-ppsc] Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] Proposed Working Group Team Charter

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree the Charter is good as-is, so the SC and GNSO aren't micromanaging
the work of the Group.  It would be a great idea for the Group to come up
with a detailed work plan at the outset, as Mike O. suggests.

 

Thanks,

Mike R.

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-ppsc@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of J. Scott Evans
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 9:09 AM
To: avri@xxxxxxx; Working Group
Cc: PPSC
Subject: [gnso-ppsc] Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] Proposed Working Group Team Charter

 

I tend to agree with Avri.  I appreciate Mike's work and I think we can work
through his questions on our first call but I don't think we should over
complicate the charter.  To date, Mike is the only person on the list that
has raised any concerns/objections to what has been circulated?

I would love to hear from others.  We have PPSC call next Wednesday where we
hope to approve the draft Charters.  In other words, please speak up.  I
don't want to assume that silence equals ascension.

jse

 

j. scott evans | senior legal director, global brand & trademark | Yahoo!
Inc. | evansj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx | 408.349.1385

 

 

  _____  

From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
To: Working Group <gnso-ppsc-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:15:34 AM
Subject: Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] Proposed Working Group Team Charter



hi,

I must say I think it an adequate charter and I think the checklist you
are suggesting are overkill for this sort of effort.

Lets try to keep it simple, please.

a.


On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 15:16 -0600, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> i am too happily on vacation to go to war over this, but the document 
> you're circulating isn't a charter in my opinion.
> 
> you use the term "charter concepts" in the second paragraph, and i 
> think all would be resolved if you re-titled your memo that way.  i'm 
> happy to see charter concepts explored and commend the work you're doing.
> 
> but let's not call this document a charter yet -- it's missing most 
> of the information that's generally considered mandatory in a project 
> charter (hence my forwarding the link to the little checklist).  this 
> lack of completeness can in turn lead to big trouble down the line, 
> especially if we never get back to finishing the job.
> 
> there are lots and lots of recipes for project charters out in the 
> project-management literature by the way (google "project charter 
> template" for lots of examples), i just forwarded the link to mine 
> because it's handy and you don't have to pay to read it.
> 
> the reason i'm being such a pain in the neck about this chartering 
> stuff is found in my write-up of the troubles we ran into while i 
> chaired the Fast Flux working group.  many of those troubles were 
> caused by a hastily-written, badly-formed charter and i don't want to 
> see us repeat that mistake here.  there's a link to my reflections 
> on this on our working-group wiki page, but i'll repeat it here;
> 
> http://www.haven2.com/FF-observations.pdf
> 
> m
> 
> 
> At 02:01 PM 1/23/2009, J. Scott Evans wrote:
> >Mike:
> >
> >This is part of the PPSC process. The PPSC is putting together 
> >Charters for the working teams in an effort to move the work along 
> >and to give each group a starting point.  I asked and the members 
> >and observers on the PPSC agree to circulate this draft to the WG 
> >Team mailing list to get input from those folks that have expressed 
> >an interest in serving on this team in order to help continue our 
> >momentum of moving things along.  The Working Team is still 
> >accepting members and we will have to revisit the Charter, if only 
> >to reaffirm that we have working groups consensus around the 
> >charter.  I appreciate you points and I welcome your 
> >input.  Additionally, this Charter is only designed to set forth in 
> >broad strokes the task of the working group and the suggested 
> >parameters for team membership.  If you have suggestions for wording 
> >that you believe would better define this, please put the 
> >forward.  I am sure the participants on the list would be happy to 
> >review any alternative wording you may have.
> >
> >With regard the other points raised in your posting, I believe the 
> >working team itself, subject to approval and input from the PPSC, 
> >will then come up with a description of deliverables, tasks, roles 
> >and responsibilities when it begins to formally meet (which I hope 
> >will be in the next week or so).  Given this reality, your list may 
> >be an excellent tool to help the team work through all these 
> >issues.  That said, I am not willing to commit the team to a process 
> >until we are formally up and running and I know we have consensus on 
> >proceeding as you suggest.  Again, however, if you have some 
> >specifics that you wish to circulate to the list, I am sure everyone 
> >would greatly appreciate any input that would help us move things along.
> >
> >Again, thanks for your engagement.
> >
> >J. Scott
> >
> >j. scott evans | senior legal director, global brand & trademark | 
> >Yahoo! Inc. | evansj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx | 408.349.1385
> >
> >
> >
> >From: Mike O'Connor <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: Gnso-ppsc-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> >Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 11:01:47 AM
> >Subject: Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] Proposed Working Group Team Charter
> >
> >
> >i think i'm confused.
> >
> >if we're working on a draft of our charter (your attached redline), 
> >isn't now the time to answer those questions?  or alternatively, 
> >should we re-title the document we're working on right now, so's to 
> >leave room/time for that first-objective charter-review you're
describing?
> >
> >a sketchy charter can lead to troubles down the line...
> >
> >at a minimum, i'd like to see a definition of the problem we're 
> >supposed to be solving, a description of the deliverables, a hint of 
> >the tasks in in front of us and a description of our roles and 
> >responsibilities as working group members.
> >
> >m
> >
> >At 12:34 PM 1/23/2009, J. Scott Evans wrote:
> > > Mike:
> > >
> > > Thanks.  One of the first objectives of the actual team will be 
> > to review the Charter.  Since you are incommunicado at the moment, 
> > we can wait until our first team meeting and work through this list 
> > if others feel it would be a worthwhile exercise.  That said, I 
> > want to move the charter discussion along quick so that we can get 
> > down to the real substantive work.
> > >
> > > I appreciate your engagement and I look forward to discussing 
> > this matter with you further after your return from vacation.
> > >
> > > J. Scott
> > >
> > > j. scott evans | senior legal director, global brand & trademark 
> > | Yahoo! Inc. | <mailto:evansj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>evansj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx | 
> > 408.349.1385
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Mike O'Connor <<mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx>mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: J. Scott Evans 
> > <<mailto:jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>; 
> > <mailto:Gnso-ppsc-wg@xxxxxxxxx>Gnso-ppsc-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 7:21:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] Proposed Working Group Team Charter
> > >
> > >
> > > hi all,
> > >
> > > thanks for the redline Scott.
> > >
> > > i'm on vacation and won't be able to really participate a lot 
> > until i get back to real Internet access in a few weeks, but i 
> > offer this small suggestion as to a series of questions that we 
> > might want to answer in our chartering;
> > >
> > > 
> >
<<http://www.haven2.com/pdchecklist.html>http://www.haven2.com/pdchecklist.h
tml>http://www.haven2.com/pdchecklist.html
> > >
> > > i'll have more to say on this once i get back from vacation but 
> > hope that we might get to a charter that can answer most of these 
> > questions before we get too far down the road.
> > >
> > > m
> > >
> > > At 07:28 PM 1/22/2009, J. Scott Evans wrote:
> > > > Dear Working Group Team Members:
> > > >
> > > > I am attaching the following documents for your consideration:
> > > >
> > > > 1.  The current draft of the WG team Charter; and
> > > >
> > > > 2.  A redlined version of the current draft showing the 
> > revisions that have been made to this document from the proposed 
> > charter originally posted on the PPSC Wiki.
> > > >
> > > > The PPSC is currently reviewing these documents and taking 
> > comments from the PPSC members and observers on these 
> > documents.  These comments will be accepted until January 28, 
> > 2009.  After that time, the PPSC will be calling for consensus on 
> > this proposed Charter.
> > > >
> > > > While one of the first tasks of the fully constituted WG Team 
> > will be to review, revise if necessary and approve this proposed 
> > Charter, I wanted to give each of those that have expressed an 
> > interest in serving on this team a chance to comment at this stage 
> > in the hopes of reducing this as a deliverable for the team once we 
> > formally begin our work.  To this end, I would ask that anyone who 
> > has comment to submit it to the list or, if you prefer, to me 
> > privately and I will pass it on to the members of the PPSC.
> > > >
> > > > If anyone has any questions, please feel free to contact me
directly.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards.
> > > >
> > > > J. Scott
> > > >
> > > > j. scott evans | senior legal director, global brand & 
> > trademark | Yahoo! Inc. | 
> >
<mailto:evansj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:evansj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>evansj@yahoo-inc.c
om 
> > | 408.349.1385
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > Checked by AVG - 
> > <<http://www.avg.com/>http://www.avg.com/>http://www.avg.com
> > > > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.12/1910 - Release 
> > Date: 1/22/2009 6:28 PM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG - <http://www.avg.com/>http://www.avg.com
> > > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.12/1910 - Release Date: 
> > 1/22/2009 6:28 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >No virus found in this incoming message.
> >Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> >Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.12/1910 - Release Date: 
> >1/22/2009 6:28 PM
> 
>