[AT-Review] Draft - next version

[Manal Ismail]

Thanks Brian ..

A quick first reaction with regards to WG2 is the missing of a reference
to the 'quorum' needed to be present at any GAC meeting for the GAC to
be able to take decisions .. It's in the current version of the GAC
Operating Principles
http://gac.icann.org/system/files/GAC_Operating_Principles_1.pdf,
principle 40 .. 

Larry has kindly offered to insert it in the report ..

 

Kind Regards

 

--Manal

 

From: at-review-bounces at icann.org [mailto:at-review-bounces at icann.org]
On Behalf Of Brian Cute
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 6:48 AM
To: at-review at icann.org; ugasser at cyber.law.harvard.edu; 'Caroline
Nolan'; rfaris at cyber.law.harvard.edu
Subject: [AT-Review] Draft - next version

 

RT,

 

Attached is the next version of the draft which incorporates our
discussion from the call yesterday.  Please note and review the
following changes:

 

Berkman statement of methodology - p.3

Revised description of PPC activities - p. 29

Corrected quote from public comment - pp. 29-30

Cheryl's definition of Cross Community deliberation - p. 29

WG3 Findings - p. 31

WG3 revised recommendation #8 - p.32

WG3 revised recommendation #9 - p.33 

WG4 - please read in entirety.  Substantial edits provided by Chris.

ATRT RFI to ICANN Staff - text from Staff response - p.37-39

California law summary (reviewed and edited by Berkman) - p.42-43

 

One point from our call that is not yet addressed in the draft is
Larry's point concerning the IRP undertaking de novo review.  Please
offer language for inclusion.

 

Note that I will do further editing to address grammar, style, structure
and citations.  If anyone has edits to suggest on this front please send
them to me.

 

Regards,

Brian 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/at-review/attachments/20101020/77e12fa3/attachment.html