[gnso-sti] Comments on Draft - v4
My first comment is that Margie did a great job in pulling together the myriad of earlier changes and today's discussion.
Background and Approach: In the first paragraph, "... which included representatives from each Stakeholder Group (identified on Annex 3), ..." should include the other groups and should read "... which included representatives from each Stakeholder Group, At-Large, Nominating Committee Appointees and the GAC (identified on Annex 3), ...".
When we make reference to the GNSO Council voting (pg 3), do we want to follow that with "The next Council meeting is scheduled for 17 December 2009"?
In the last sentence of the intro talking about minority reports, "know" should be "known". Just above it, the tabbing after the bullets is not consistent (but is artistic!;-) )
TC introduction: I may be wrong, but I thought that we decided today to use the term "consensus" in the first sentence, but to have a footnote referencing the fact that it was not a full consensus. But perhaps that was an earlier step and we fixed the problem with other text.
TC 5.2 (ii) There is a period missing between TC and ICANN.URS 4.2 The title should omit the word "Default" (as discussed, a decision or its results are not impacted by a default.
URS 4.3 The word Default is ok in this section because a late answer if only relevant if there was a default.
URS 5.1 Grammar is not my strong point, but I think that it should be "... ON an expedited basis ..."
URS 5.3 I believe that the intent was that a late answer could be filed "... at any time during the life of the registration."
URS 6.5 The second-to-last sentence "Providers should have the right to drop nonperforming examiners." should be dropped because it is now covered a few lines above in the parenthetical.
Please indicate in the Level-of-Consensus column that At-Large will be submitting minority position on items TC 2.1, TC 4.2, TC 7.1 and URS 7.2.