<div dir="ltr">Hi all<div>I see a straightforward choice. Either we could wait to share the documents with the full group until that certification is available, leaving less review time, or we could run the processes in parallel - CCWG review/input and finalisation.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm strongly supportive of the second approach. It gives all of us more time to digest the very large document, to understand it and to ensure our feedback is absorbed and taken into account.</div><div><br></div><div>As always, in a perfect world, we could have waited and done these things one after another. And as always, the world is not perfect.</div><div><br></div><div>Speak with you all soon!</div><div><br></div><div>cheers</div><div>Jordan</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 4 April 2016 at 09:55, Seun Ojedeji <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">Hello Milton,</p>
<p dir="ltr">What they are asking is fine, but it should be that they confirm/believe it's consistent with the recommendations (to the best of their knowledge). The statement by the legal team did not confirm that. It instead implies that such confirmation will come on the publication day which IMO is not what has been done in the past.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I am not underestimating the capacity of the "volunteer" CCWG but i am not so certain we could review all these effectively, but if what is provided to us is a document that has been agreed to by the DUO then there is the likelihood that we may only be seeing some few inconsistencies and way be missing just a few if any at all. While this current process can continue (even though I would have preferred to avoid this back and forth), I am of the opinion that it will be good to have a review period after legal confirm draft before publishing for PC.</p><span class="im HOEnZb">
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>
<p dir="ltr">Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos</p>
</span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_quote">On 3 Apr 2016 22:35, "Mueller, Milton L" <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu" target="_blank">milton@gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Well, Seun, maybe they are asking us for our opinion as to whether the draft meets the recommendations and if not, what needs to change. (Or am I too optimistic
about the process?)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="m_1753661091647489772_m_3047556895092533426__MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p>I don't think it's all helpful to be reviewing a document that has not be agreed to by the DUO to accurately reflect the intent of the proposal(s). The idea is that if such action has happened prior to the CCWG/CWG looking at the draft then there will be
less possibility of missing critical parts of the document.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:small">Jordan Carter<br><br>Chief Executive <br><b>InternetNZ </b></div><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:small"><b><br></b></div><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:small">+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) | Skype: jordancarter <br><a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a> | <a href="http://www.internetnz.nz" target="_blank">www.internetnz.nz</a> </div><div style="font-size:small"><i><br></i></div><div style="font-size:small"><i>A better world through a better Internet</i></div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>