Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] updated summary of the Second Milestone Report public forum

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I tend to beleive that the WG needs to produce, with staff help, a proper 
response to the comments from the 2nd milestone report.  Following some 
excellent examples from staff in the new gTLD process and other WGs, and 
comments made by the AOC Accountability and Transparency review about giving 
proper regard to the responses of comments, I do not see how we can do 
otherwise.  And while I have no doubt about the short shrift that ALAC/At-large 
have received on comments in the past (I remember the days when ALAC had to 
include an RSVP at the end of the communiqués to the Board if they had any hope 
of getting a response), I do not think that is a good reason for doing the same 
to others.

>From a practical point of view, if we do not respond to the comments, those 
>who commented, when the next comment period comes around will be justified in 
>saying:  "no way am I supporting this proposal - I commented and they ignored 
>my comments."  They would be wrong, of course, we did not ignore the comments, 
>but how would they know that we considered their comments and decided not to 
>do as they asked for reasons a, b and c.

So I beleive the JAS WG needs to follow through and produce a comments report 
that is in keeping with current ICANN standards for such reports.

I have been in many ICANN WGs.  In each and every one of them, one of the staff 
members wrote up the comments and the responses, perhaps with the aid of the 
chair, and then the WG walked through each one of them, giving comment and 
direction for correction.  The policy staff that have worked  in other GNSO WGs 
I have been in have been superb at guiding the WG through this activity and 
producing a credible redsponse document. I have every expectation that this 
WG's expert staff support would be every bit as good.

I suggest that this, and neither of the proposals given by Karla, should be the 
path this WG takes. 

Thanks
avri


On 12 Sep 2011, at 23:06, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

> 
> 
> On 12 September 2011 22:41, Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear Carlton and Rafik,
> 
>  
> 
> I am resending the Second Milestone Summary that is still missing an analysis 
> from the WG. Please let me know how you want to proceed with this?  Here are 
> few options:
> 
> ·         We post only summary and point people to the Final Report. This is 
> not ideal as it does not provide direct response to comments people expect.
> 
> ·         Have one or more WG members work on the proposed text for the 
> analysis and send to the mailing list for approval by Friday.
> 
> 
> I'm personally happy with the first option. We have neither the time nor the 
> resources to start churning on historical text.
> 
> As for the "direct response people expect".... well, At-Large has been 
> commenting on issues for years and has yet to receive a direct response on 
> most of them. So incorporating comments, rather than responding point by 
> point to comments, is a mode more familiar to the At-Large members here. If 
> it's considered to be acceptable treatment for us, it should be acceptable to 
> others as well.
> 
> Sure it's not ideal. Nothing to do with the parameters and environment we 
> deal with is ideal. Why start now?
> 
> - Evan
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
>  
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Karla Valente
> 
> Director, gTLD Registry Programs
> 
> Mobile:  +1 310 936 4639 
> 
>  
> 
> From: Karla Valente 
> Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 3:28 PM
> To: soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Seth Greene; Wendy Profit
> Subject: updated summary of the Second Milestone Report public forum
> Importance: High
> 
>  
> 
> Dear JAS- WG,
> 
>  
> 
> Please find attached the updated summary of the second milestone report 
> public comments. The new content is in BLUE, which now includes two more 
> comments:
> 
> (1) the ALAC-GAC submission and
> 
> (2) the second, much longer submission by UISOC (I.A. Shah, Pakistan).
> 
>  
> 
> Both of these comments are posted in the public forum list under 4 Aug. 2011.
> 
>  
> 
> Please let me know if you have questions.
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you,
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Karla Valente
> 
> Director, gTLD Registry Programs
> 
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 
> 
> Direct:  + 1 310 301 3878  
> 
> Mobile:  +1 310 936 4639 
> 
> Skype: kdlvalente
> 
>  
> 
>