<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Michele,</p>
<p>I'm with you in keeping our work efficient and solving issues as
quickly as possible. But the "coin" has two sides, which should
look still nice after.</p>
<p>Best regards</p>
<p>Wolf-Ulrich<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 14.07.2017 um 15:45 schrieb Michele
Neylon - Blacknight:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:49266513-548E-4FF8-8A99-02F88BCD7F62@blacknight.com">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Title" content="">
<meta name="Keywords" content="">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Wolf-Ulrich</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>I disagree.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>The way it is currently worded
provides clear motivation to resolve the situation via a
deadline or ultimatum. Removing that will mean we’ll
probably still be discussing this in a year’s time and I
honestly don’t think that’s a good use of our time.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>I’d prefer to see this situation
resolved quickly and the current wording provides a clear
incentive to get it done quickly.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Regards</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Michele</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>--</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Mr Michele Neylon</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Blacknight Solutions</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Hosting, Colocation & Domains</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.blacknight.com/">https://www.blacknight.com/</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://blacknight.blog/">http://blacknight.blog/</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Personal blog:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://michele.blog/">https://michele.blog/</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Some thoughts: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://ceo.hosting/">https://ceo.hosting/</a>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>-------------------------------</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd,
Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty</span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93
X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845</span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>From: </span></b><span>"Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de"><wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de></a><br>
<b>Date: </b>Friday 14 July 2017 at 14:40<br>
<b>To: </b>Michele Neylon <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:michele@blacknight.com"><michele@blacknight.com></a>,
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">"council@gnso.icann.org"</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"><council@gnso.icann.org></a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [council] Motion on next steps in
relation to the charter for the CCWG-IG</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<p>Michele and all,</p>
<p>very simple: there is just a target set in Res. 3, and Res. 4
imposes an automatic withdrawal independent from whether the
target has been achieved or not. I think the dependency
between both should be phrased more clear.</p>
<p>Bet regards</p>
<p>Wolf-Ulrich</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Am 14.07.2017 um 10:47 schrieb Michele
Neylon - Blacknight:</p>
</div>
<blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Wolf-Ulrich</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sorry, but which part of the motion is
causing this concern for you? I honestly can’t see it.
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Regards</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Michele</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">--</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Mr Michele Neylon</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Blacknight Solutions</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hosting, Colocation & Domains</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.blacknight.com/"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.blacknight.com/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blacknight.blog/"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://blacknight.blog/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Personal blog:
<a href="https://michele.blog/" moz-do-not-send="true">https://michele.blog/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Some thoughts:
<a href="https://ceo.hosting/" moz-do-not-send="true">https://ceo.hosting/</a>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-------------------------------</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd,
Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty</p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93
X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:
</b><a href="mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><council-bounces@gnso.icann.org></a>
on behalf of "Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben"
<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de"
moz-do-not-send="true"><wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de></a><br>
<b>Date: </b>Friday 14 July 2017 at 00:03<br>
<b>To: </b><a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">"council@gnso.icann.org"</a> <a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">
<council@gnso.icann.org></a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[council] Motion on next steps in
relation to the charter for the CCWG-IG</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">All,<br>
<br>
following the discussion at the council call today I think
Res. 3 and 4 are lacking consistency with respect to the
withdrawal from the present structure and a (potential and
not impossible) GNSO engagement in the new structure. The
GNSO should definitely not take any step towards
withdrawal before the future model is clear. I'd like to
encourage the proponents of the motion to take this into
consideration when reintroducing the deferred motion.<br>
<br>
Best regards<br>
<br>
Wolf-Ulrich<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<u>Res. from the motion</u><br>
<br>
3. The GNSO Council requests that members of the CCWG-IG
and others interested parties come together to explore a
framework / model that more fully addresses the concerns
that have been expressed by the GNSO Council, and submit
this framework / model to the GNSO Council for its
consideration by ICANN60.<br>
<br>
4. To facilitate the work as requested under Resolved
clause #3, allowing for a reasonable time to coordinate
with other SOs and ACs to develop a new structure, and to
ensure there is no gap between the retirement of the
CCWG-IC and the establishment of its successor group, the
GNSO Council shall withdraw as a Chartering Organization
from the CCWG-IG effective at the conclusion of ICANN 60
in Abu Dhabi.
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>