<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
- To: "Larisa B. Gurnick" <larisa.gurnick@xxxxxxxxx>, Ron Andruff <ra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 22:21:52 +0000
In my opinion, it would be better to delay briefly than to add questions that
produce unhelpful results.
Chuck
From: Larisa B. Gurnick [mailto:larisa.gurnick@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 1:59 PM
To: Ron Andruff; Gomes, Chuck; gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Richard G A Westlake'
Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
Further clarification would be very much appreciated as Westlake is finalizing
the 360 Assessment in preparation for launch on Monday.
The purpose of the Working Groups was based on the information posted on the
GNSO web site - http://gnso.icann.org/en/basics/101/wg-operations.
Thanks,
Larisa
From: Ron Andruff
[mailto:ra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:ra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 9:29 AM
To: Larisa B. Gurnick; 'Gomes, Chuck';
gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Richard G A Westlake'
Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
Thanks for this input, Larisa. I will defer to Chuck and other members for a
better response to your proposed question, but the purpose of a WG is not:
"enlisting broad participation from throughout the Internet community" as I
understand it.
Chuck, your thoughts?
Kind regards,
RA
Ron Andruff
dotSport LLC
www.lifedotsport.com<http://www.lifedotsport.com>
From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Larisa B. Gurnick
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 14:17
To: Gomes, Chuck; Ron Andruff;
gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Richard G A Westlake'
Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
Chuck and Ron,
Please note that the work of the working groups will likely be considered by
Westlake as part of the other data gathering phases of the review - review and
analysis of documents and one on one interviews. The GNSO Review Working Group
along with policy staff can provide guidance to Westlake Governance on which
Working Groups would be good candidates for review.
As for the inclusion of the Working Group model in the 360 Assessment, what do
you think about the following:
New question: The general purpose of a GNSO Working Group is to accomplish a
chartered task by enlisting broad participation from throughout the Internet
community. The Working Group model implemented as the result of the last GNSO
Review is effective in accomplishing its general purpose.
The question would have all the same answer options as other questions,
including a text box for additional feedback.
Thanks,
Larisa
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 11:09 AM
To: Ron Andruff; Larisa B. Gurnick;
gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Richard G A Westlake'
Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
I am fine with that Ron if it doesn't cause too much delay.
Chuck
From: Ron Andruff [mailto:ra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 11:15 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Larisa B. Gurnick';
gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Richard G A Westlake'
Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
Dear Chuck and all,
Yes, but... ...you make a good point that we are not delving into Working
Groups at all when, in point of fact, the changes made during the last GNSO
review moved us to the Working Group model. For my part, I think it would be
prudent to have at least one question on the effectiveness of WGs and perhaps
another to flesh out the community's overall view of them. Let's do our best
to address this key aspect. Thanks for bringing it forward Chuck.
Kind regards,
RA
Ron Andruff
dotSport LLC
www.lifedotsport.com<http://www.lifedotsport.com>
From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx]>
On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 19:05
To: Larisa B. Gurnick; gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Richard G A Westlake
Subject: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
I just completed the survey in a little over 30 minutes. I answered questions
for the GNSO Council and the RySG but I did not respond the last three open
ended questions.
I think the assessment is looking very good. Because working groups are such
an important part of the GNSO, I think it is unfortunate that there are no
questions about them. At the same time I also am not in favor of trying to
accomplish too much in one survey so I am not advocating that we add more
questions at this time.
Chuck
From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Larisa B. Gurnick
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 6:50 PM
To: gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Richard G A Westlake
Subject: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review 360 Assessment - Revised
Dear All,
The Westlake Governance team modified the 360 Assessment based on feedback
received last week. The revised 360 Assessment is available
here<https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GNSO360ReviewUATv3>. Please provide your
final feedback and any additional comments from your constituencies by August
1, 23:59 UTC.
The responder now has the option of skipping the detailed questions pertaining
to the GNSO Council, Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies. A responder who is
directly involved or is a close observer in any of these groups, will be able
to answer detailed questions for as many groups as he/she would like.
The introductory language will be further refined to provide a clear roadmap of
the different sections of the Assessment and the options available to the
responder.
Please note that staff is in the process of completing a detailed proofing and
editing to ensure proper spelling, capitalization, definition of acronyms, etc.
Thank you for your feedback and commitment to making this assessment useful and
informative.
Larisa B. Gurnick
Director, Strategic Initiatives
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
larisa.gurnick@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:larisa.gurnick@xxxxxxxxx>
310 383-8995
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|