RE: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Re: Proposed agenda - Thick Whois WG meeting

[Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Marie-Laure,

Thank you for this, your apology has been noted.,

Kind regards

Nathalie

From: Marie-laure Lemineur [mailto:mllemineur@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 3:27 PM
To: Alan Greenberg
Cc: Mike O'Connor; Thick Whois WG; Nathalie Peregrine
Subject: Re: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Re: Proposed agenda - Thick Whois WG 
meeting

Dear all,

Apologies but I won' t be able to attend the call today.

Kind regards,

Marie-laure



Sent from my iPad

On 19/08/2013, at 13:41, Alan Greenberg 
<alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Presuming the draft report with staff comments is archived somewhere, one could 
submit a public comment pointing to that report.  A lot easier than extracting 
the comments.  Alan

At 19/08/2013 03:21 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:

i may have muddied the waters here.  i can't remember if i asked that those 
staff comments be submitted as a public comment, or that they just get 
forwarded to the working group and incorporated into this round of discussion 
directly.  with perfect 20/20 hindsight, i wish i'd been clearer that those 
staff comments be submitted as a public comment -- so that other commenters 
could have seen them and reacted to them.

mikey

On Aug 19, 2013, at 12:34 PM, Marika Konings 
<marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:


Hi Steve,

Almost all of these come from the marked up version that I shared with the WG 
prior to finalizing the Initial Report. It was decided at the time to consider 
these together with the comments received on the Initial Report and these were 
added to the 'bucket list'. I am happy to share the original document again if 
that would be helpful.

Best regards,

Marika

On 19 Aug 2013, at 18:55, "Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx<mailto:met@xxxxxxx>> 
wrote:


Marika,

In your chart there are several references to ICANN Staff comments.  These 
comments do not appear in the public comment forum. 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-thick-whois-initial-21jun13/   Shouldn’t 
they?  Otherwise it will be difficult for anyone to understand and evaluate our 
response to them.  There is also a transparency concern if the staff comments 
“privately” and these are treated the same as public comments.

Steve

From: 
owner-gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
 [ mailto:owner-gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 12:18 PM
To: gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Proposed agenda - Thick Whois WG meeting

Dear All,

Please find below the proposed agenda for the next Thick Whois WG Meeting 
(Tuesday 20 August at 14.00 UTC). Note that I've made a small addition to 
comment #14 based on feedback received from a colleague.

Best regards,

Marika

Proposed Agenda – Thick Whois WG Meeting on 20 August at 14.00 UTC

 1.  Roll Call / SOI
 2.  Continue review of public comments received – see public comment review 
tool attached
 3.  Confirm next steps & next meeting


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: 
www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, 
Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)