Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] a first idea to trash

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I am not suggesting it do the work of the WG.  I am suggesting it start to form 
the WG, which takes a few weeks, it puts out a call for constituency and 
community comments and it asks the staff to amplify its report by brinign the 
various reports together.  The DT could be done in 1-2  weeks with the WG 
already starting during that time.

The work is all in the WG.

a.

On 2 Feb 2010, at 18:26, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:

> My understanding is that the current group only works on the charter and that 
> a new group is formed once the charter is approved. That new group is the WG.
> 
> If we blend these two steps into one, I expect you will find more people 
> wanting to be on the charter drafting team, thereby overloading that team.
> 
> The two should be kept distinct in my opinion, with a validation by council 
> step after the charter has been produced and then a call for WG participation.
> 
> Also, I would suggest you are starting this discussion a little early. We 
> don't yet have every SG or constituency's rep on the charter DT and therefore 
> the mailing list is limited to a few people at the moment.
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 3 févr. 2010 à 00:16, Avri Doria a écrit :
> 
>> 
>> hi,
>> 
>> I asume the council has to review it and probably approve it, but i am not 
>> sure that doesn't mean we can't start the prep work.  I did suggest the 
>> council review as week 3,  which is when i think your next meeting is if 
>> this is week one.
>> 
>> The council voted for 16 weeks, which means start ASAP.  And the council set 
>> the topic so I am suggesting that collecting statements and comments and 
>> getting the staff started could be initiated out of the drafting team.  And 
>> of course going to the Council for an email review seems reasonable if for 
>> some reason we do not complete the charter in time for motion deadline - 
>> assuming this needs a motion instead of just a 'does anyone object and who 
>> shall we appoint as liaison' agenda item.
>> 
>> a.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2 Feb 2010, at 17:56, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>> 
>>> Avri,
>>> 
>>> Are you assuming that the Council does not need to approve the charter
>>> as usually happens?  If not, are you assuming that the Council could
>>> approve it via email?
>>> 
>>> Chuck 
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
>>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 5:51 PM
>>>> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>>>> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] a first idea to trash
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> In order to kick off the debate on a charter, i offer the 
>>>> following as a first timetable as a conversation starter:
>>>> 
>>>> The Motion defined the task as:
>>>> 
>>>> - the PDP shall evaluate which policy recommendations, if 
>>>> any,  should be developed on the topic of vertical 
>>>> integration between registrars and registries affecting both 
>>>> new gTLDs and existing gTLDs, as may be possible under 
>>>> existing contracts and as allowed under the ICANN Bylaws;
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Week 1, 2  -  Council Drafting team will create a charter for 
>>>> the group 
>>>>                  -  Original recruitment for group members 
>>>> wil go out to the constituencies and the ICANN community. 
>>>>                  -  Staff begins documentation on existing 
>>>> approaches and practices, differentiating among Vertical 
>>>> Integration, Joint Marketing approaches
>>>>                      and cross-ownership, indicating 
>>>> differences of the effects on registrants and users of the approaches.
>>>> 
>>>> Week 3 - Council review charter and appoint council liaison.
>>>> 
>>>> week 4 - Group begins work.  
>>>>             (Collect Constituency statement and community 
>>>> comments weeks 2 - 5)
>>>> 
>>>> week 5, 6 - Review of existing documents and commentary. 
>>>>                - Publish Staff document on existing 
>>>> approaches and practices
>>>> 
>>>> week 7 - 9 - Review staff document and constituency and 
>>>> public comments
>>>> 
>>>> week  9 - 11 - Discuss conditions under which various 
>>>> practices are appropriate
>>>> 
>>>> week 12 - 15 - Discuss and document policy recommendations
>>>> 
>>>> week 16 -  Send report to Council and out for public review.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>