[gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public Session in Buenos Aires

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Larisa.  That helps a lot.  I will try to insert my responses this week.

Chuck

From: Larisa B. Gurnick [mailto:larisa.gurnick@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 5:32 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Charla Shambley; gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Colin Jackson 
(colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx); Vaughan Renner
Subject: RE: GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public Session in Buenos Aires

Chuck,
Staff responses to your questions are included below.

  *   Should we enter our opinion as to whether the recommendation should be 
'accepted as is', 'accepted with modification', or 'rejected' along with our 
rationale?  - The opinion of the GNSO Review Working Party members would be 
useful, given your knowledge and experience with the GNSO Review and the work 
of the GNSO.  A basis or rationale might include: cost/benefit considerations, 
alignment with strategic direction of ICANN, aspects that are out of scope for 
the review, insufficient information about the finding or the recommendation,  
and potential impact on another group.
  *   Does it make sense to do this before the public comment ends and we have 
the comment summary?  - Yes, public comments will be summarized by staff and 
considered by Westlake, in addition to the feedback from the GNSO Review 
Working Party.  Your opinion and feedback would provide Westlake with 
additional useful information to consider as they refine and finalize their 
report and recommendations.
  *   Am I correct that it would be helpful if we rate the feasibility and 
usefulness of the recommendation?  If so, how should we rate these two factors? 
 A common scale for all of us would be helpful. - In forming your opinion as to 
whether the recommendation should be accepted, modified or rejected, you would 
be considering whether the recommendation is feasible and useful.  A basis or 
rationale might include: cost/benefit considerations, alignment with strategic 
direction of ICANN, aspects that are out of scope for the review, insufficient 
information about the finding or the recommendation,  and potential impact on 
another group.

Best wishes,
Larisa


From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 1:20 PM
To: Charla Shambley; gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Colin Jackson 
(colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>); Vaughan 
Renner
Subject: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public 
Session in Buenos Aires

Charla,

Before I enter comments in the Initial Assessment, I want to make sure I 
understand what is being requested.

*         Should we enter our opinion as to whether the recommendation should 
be 'accepted as is', 'accepted with modification', or 'rejected' along with our 
rationale?

*         Does it make sense to do this before the public comment ends and we 
have the comment summary?

*         Am I correct that it would be helpful if we rate the feasibility and 
usefulness of the recommendation?  If so, how should we rate these two factors? 
 A common scale for all of us would be helpful.

Chuck

From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charla Shambley
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2015 1:12 PM
To: gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Colin Jackson 
(colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>); Vaughan 
Renner
Subject: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public Session in 
Buenos Aires

Dear GNSO Review Working Party:

I hope this email finds you well after ICANN53!  Following up to Larisa's email 
which summarized your work in Buenos Aires and next steps, I wanted to point 
out a few items:


*        Staff has set up several wiki pages to capture comments from the 
Working Party and Staff on the feasibility and usefulness of the 36 
recommendations.  See Initial Assessment of 
Recommendations<https://community.icann.org/display/GR2/Initial+Assessment+of+Recommendations>.
  We have organized the recommendations by theme to coincide with the structure 
of the Draft Report.  Each recommendation has its own page (see Recommendation 
1<https://community.icann.org/display/GR2/Recommendation+1> for example).  
Please add your comments in the "Working Party" section (you must be logged in 
to the wiki in order to do so) and include your name or initials to your 
comments.



*        A doodle poll has been set up to schedule a Working Party call on 28, 
29 or 30 July to consider community comments and prioritize draft 
recommendations.  Please click on the link to provide your availability: Doodle 
Poll<http://doodle.com/c686t94p7ph4rnec>.  I will close the poll by 8 July and 
send out an invitation for your calendar.


*        Relevant discussion for implementation planning - please see the 
summary of comments and 
responses<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15/msg00002.html>
 from the 24 June public session "AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting 
ICANN 
Accountability<https://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews>".

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Charla


Charla K. Shambley
Strategic Initiatives Program Manager
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA  90094
310-578-8921