Re: [dssa] i stole some of our stuff as rapporteur for the ISPCP comments on ICANN's SSR role and remit

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

argh…

i hate it when the answer to my question is staring me in the face right there 
on the web page.  

i suppose it could be in a more obvious place, or worded more clearly, but i 
can't quite imagine how.  :-)

thanks guys,

mikey


On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:21 AM, David Olive wrote:

> Patrick, Don and Mikey:
> 
> I saw this exchange and asked Filiz Yilmaz to provide further details.
> 
> Regards,     David
> 
> ===========================================================
> 
> 
> My name is Filiz Yilmaz, ICANN Staff.
> 
> I would like to address the recent mails regarding the ICANN Public
> Comment Process.
> 
> As Don Blumenthal already noted, the new system was put in place by Jan
> 2012, as implementation of ATRT recommendations 15, 16, 17 and 21.
> 
> He also explained the Comment and Reply periods. I would just like to
> provide confirmation of his points mostly, as the ICANN Staff who holds
> the main responsibility of the implementation and management of this
> process. 
> 
> The main criteria set for this system are as noted at
> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment:
> 
> - The official minimum Comment period is 21 days.
> - The official minimum Reply period is 21 days.
> - If no substantive comments are received during the Comment period, then
> there will be no Reply period.
> - During the Reply period, participants should address previous comments
> submitted; new posts concerning the topic should not be introduced. When
> constructing Replies, contributors are asked to cite the original poster's
> name, comment date, and any particular text that is pertinent.
> 
> 
> 
> Last point relates to the recent question raised in the list. As Don also
> noted, the main intention behind the Reply period is mainly to address the
> previous comments and have some discussion regarding them, facilitating
> the desired consensus-building process.
> 
> While this system has been in place for about 6 months now, the ICANN
> Board's Public Participation Committee (PPC) will hold a session to
> receive community feedback and experience about the process again during
> their consultation session during ICANN 44 in Prague.
> Please join us in this session to provide your feedback on Thursday 28
> June (9:00 ­ 10:30 am).
> You can find the details of the session at:
> 
> http://prague44.icann.org/node/31809
> 
> 
> Please let me know if I can be any further help.
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> ---
> Filiz Yilmaz
> Sr Dir Participation and Engagement
> ICANN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David A. Olive
> Vice President, Policy Development Support
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
> 1101 New York Avenue, NW - Suite 930
> Washington, D.C.    20005
> Office: 202.570.7126      Mobile:  202.341.3611
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 6/15/12 9:03 AM, "Patrick Jones" <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Yes, in my mind this reply period really just makes it a 60 day comment
>> period on the role & remit statement.
>> 
>> And there's certainly plenty of ideas in the ISPCP comment to consider
>> with a reply comment.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:44 AM, "Don Blumenthal" <dblumenthal@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> The reply period is a new mechanism added at the beginning of the year
>>> as
>>> part of work to implement some of the ATRT recommendations (15-17?). I
>>> was
>>> part of the focus group that decided to complicate the process.
>>> 
>>> The period for comments is what it always was, and ends tomorrow in this
>>> case. The added reply period is for comments on the comments, and
>>> hopefully a bit of online discussion. With that out of the way, some
>>> folks
>>> have been known to use the reply slot as a de facto extension of the
>>> time
>>> to comment.
>>> 
>>> Don
>>> 
>>> On 6/15/12 8:26 AM, "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ah ha!  i've caught me a live one.  somebody who actually knows what's
>>>> going on.
>>>> 
>>>> what *is* the "reply period" anyhow?  can you give us the quick and
>>>> dirty
>>>> difference between comment-period and reply-period?
>>>> 
>>>> thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> mikey
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jun 15, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Patrick Jones wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Mikey,
>>>>> 
>>>>> The comment process is a bit confusing. With the reply period
>>>>> included,
>>>>> the actual deadline is 16 July, not tomorrow. But early comments are
>>>>> welcomed to drive discussion in Prague.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Patrick
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:19 AM, "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> hi all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> i'd be curious to hear your reactions to the comments we, the GNSO
>>>>>> ISPCP constituency, just submitted in response to the request for
>>>>>> comments on the proposed SSR role and remit.  i "repurposed" some of
>>>>>> our cool ideas and drawings spiff them up a bit.  you can do that too
>>>>>> if you want -- that's why we published the Powerpoint file that has
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> the pictures in it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> here's the link to the "comments received" page (do note how lonely
>>>>>> our response is at this moment -- ours is but one of two -- 'seems
>>>>>> like
>>>>>> there should be more -- deadline is tomorrow).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://forum.icann.org/lists/draft-ssr-role-remit/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> mikey
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>>>>> phone    651-647-6109
>>>>>> fax          866-280-2356
>>>>>> web    http://www.haven2.com
>>>>>> handle    OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,
>>>>>> Google, etc.)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - - - - - - - - -
>>>> phone    651-647-6109
>>>> fax          866-280-2356
>>>> web    http://www.haven2.com
>>>> handle    OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,
>>>> Google,
>>>> etc.)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)