Re: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report

["J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

While I agree that the recommendation could be clearer given that two of the 
SGs operate without Constituencies, I cannot say that I disagree with the 
premise that those SGs that have Constituencies should allocate the Council 
seats equally amongst constituencies.

J. Scott Evans

________________________________________
From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx> on behalf 
of Jen Wolfe <jwolfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:43 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Amr Elsadr
Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft 
Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report

Thanks, Chuck.  I am attaching a revised version of the draft communication.  I 
accepted Amr's changes and added a few of my own (redlined in the attached 
document).  I also made the formatting/renumbering changes.  I went ahead and 
accepted the formatting changes to keep it easier to read.  Please let me know 
if you have any concerns with the proposed revisions.

If any one else would like to make revisions, please just let us know so we can 
continue to track versions appropriately.  Again, we are targeting to provide 
this draft to council by Thursday before their meeting.  If I don't receive any 
objections, I will provide to staff to circulate to GNSO Council on Thursday 
morning (EDT).

Pending feedback from Council, we will either proceed with providing this to 
the OEC or, if there is objection in the community or from Council, we will 
notify the OEC that there is concern about Revised Recommendation 23 and that a 
more formal statement with be forthcoming, pending time for review and comment.

Thanks again for your continued support of this effort- have a great day!

Jen

JENNIFER C. WOLFE, ESQ., APR, SSBB
FOUNDER & PRESIDENT, WOLFE DOMAIN, A DIGITAL BRAND STRATEGY ADVISORY FIRM
513.746.2800 X 1 OR CELL 513.238.4348
IAM 300 - TOP 300 GLOBAL IP STRATEGISTS 2011-2014
What will you do with your Dot Brand?  : http://ow.ly/Ebl8P
Subscribe to Our You Tube Channel on Brand gTLDs  http://ow.ly/Eblgc
Jen Wolfe gTLD Click Z Column  http://ow.ly/EbljP
Linked In Group:  gTLD Strategy for Brands http://ow.ly/EbloM

-----Original Message-----
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:43 AM
To: Jen Wolfe <jwolfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft 
Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report

Amr's edits look fine to me.

Jen - I fully support you adding your comments about the other recommendations 
and also restructuring as you think best.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Jen Wolfe
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:49 AM
To: gnso-review-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Amr Elsadr
Subject: FW: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft 
Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report

I am forwarding the revised document from Amr.  Thanks, Amr for taking the 
first pass at making revisions noted.  If you plan to make edits, please send a 
quick note around so we can track version control.

I would like to add my suggestion that we include either in the opening, 
conclusion or both that there are 35 other recommendations, many of which there 
is wide spread consensus for support, based upon public comments, and that we, 
as the Working Party will be meeting to discuss recommendations on 
implementation.  Please let me know if that continues to be acceptable to 
everyone.

We still need to restructure the numbering as well, per our discussion.  I'm 
happy to do that.  Please let me know, though, if anyone else wants to make 
substantive changes and I'll wait to make the structure changes and incorporate 
my above comment.  We are targeting delivering this to GNSO Council by 
Thursday, prior to the council meeting.

If anyone from the BC or IPC can offer comments, that would be greatly helpful. 
 There was no one on the last two calls and just want to make sure you do not 
object to this communication.

Thanks so much for your continued support and commitment to this process!

Jen

JENNIFER C. WOLFE, ESQ., APR, SSBB
FOUNDER & PRESIDENT, WOLFE DOMAIN, A DIGITAL BRAND STRATEGY ADVISORY FIRM
513.746.2800 X 1 OR CELL 513.238.4348
IAM 300 - TOP 300 GLOBAL IP STRATEGISTS 2011-2014 What will you do with your 
Dot Brand?  : http://ow.ly/Ebl8P Subscribe to Our You Tube Channel on Brand 
gTLDs  http://ow.ly/Eblgc Jen Wolfe gTLD Click Z Column  http://ow.ly/EbljP 
Linked In Group:  gTLD Strategy for Brands http://ow.ly/EbloM

-----Original Message-----
From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:57 PM
To: Jen Wolfe <jwolfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-review-dt] [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review Working Party Draft 
Statement on Westlake Goverance’s Final GNSO Review Report

Hi,

I’ve attached a document to this email with the changes I suggested during 
today’s call, along with a couple more. As suggested by Chuck, I used a clean 
copy of the document following the edits provided by Bill, then made redline 
changes to that so that all changes following today’s call are clearly visible.

Could you please forward this to the working party list for consideration?

Thanks Jen.

Amr