[AT-Review] Work items

[olivier.muron at orange-ftgroup.com]

I attached the doc with revision marks,
Best,
O

________________________________

De : at-review-bounces at icann.org [mailto:at-review-bounces at icann.org] De la part de Willie Currie
Envoyé : vendredi 14 mai 2010 16:20
Cc : at-review at icann.org
Objet : Re: [AT-Review] Work items


Thanks, Olivier. What do people think? Is it better to push people to address whether there is a problem or ask a more neutral question?

 I don't see your general question on global internet users - could you resend it?

Best
Willie

olivier.muron at orange-ftgroup.com wrote: 

	Willie, Brian, all,
	 
	I rephrased the first two questions. I don't feel at ease beginning the consultation with " Do you think there is a problem...".  I think it might be better to begin with a more neutral question."What is your general assessment of...".
	 
	I added a general question on ICANN's commitment to the interests of global Internet users, 
	 
	Best,
	 
	Olivier

________________________________

	De : at-review-bounces at icann.org [mailto:at-review-bounces at icann.org] De la part de Willie Currie
	Envoyé : vendredi 14 mai 2010 15:20
	À : briancute at afilias.info
	Cc : at-review at icann.org
	Objet : Re: [AT-Review] Work items
	
	
	Brian, all
	
	Here is the latest version of the questions, with a reformulation of question 4 by Fabio.
	
	Best
	Willie
	
	  Brian Cute wrote: 

		RT,

		

		Our most immediate work item is the draft questions for the Community that were drafted by Cheryl, Olivier and Willie.  We have a deadline of May 15th to submit the questions for posting.  Please review the questions and post any proposed edits so we can meet this deadline.

		

		Looking forward, since paragraph 9.1 of the AoC has 5 areas of review (the Board, the GAC, public input, public support of decisions and policy development process), I suggest that we establish "sub-committees" headed by two members of the RT who oversee the work of each area of review.  The two responsible members would ensure that the review work remains focused and aligned with the RT's methodology and on time for deliverables in December.  The sub- committee approach would not prevent any RT member from participating directly in the work of any of the 5 areas of review - it is intended to ensure organization and efficiency given our the limited number of members on the RT.

		

		If this approach is acceptable, please think about the area that you would like to volunteer for and indicate that in advance of our next scheduled call.  The Doodle for our next call is almost complete.  If you haven't indicated your availability, please do so and we will send out the meeting maker and telephone bridge.

		

		Regards,

		Brian

		
________________________________


		_______________________________________________
		AT-Review mailing list
		AT-Review at icann.org
		https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-review
		  



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/at-review/attachments/20100514/a8f7c972/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATRR community questions_v2om.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 31232 bytes
Desc: ATRR community questions_v2om.doc
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/at-review/attachments/20100514/a8f7c972/attachment.doc