[gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public Session in Buenos Aires

Gomes, Chuck cgomes at Verisign.com
Mon Jul 6 23:06:29 UTC 2015


Thanks Larisa.  That helps a lot.  I will try to insert my responses this week.

Chuck

From: Larisa B. Gurnick [mailto:larisa.gurnick at icann.org]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 5:32 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Charla Shambley; gnso-review-dt at icann.org
Cc: richard at westlakegovernance.com; Colin Jackson (colin at westlakegovernance.com); Vaughan Renner
Subject: RE: GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public Session in Buenos Aires

Chuck,
Staff responses to your questions are included below.

  *   Should we enter our opinion as to whether the recommendation should be 'accepted as is', 'accepted with modification', or 'rejected' along with our rationale?  - The opinion of the GNSO Review Working Party members would be useful, given your knowledge and experience with the GNSO Review and the work of the GNSO.  A basis or rationale might include: cost/benefit considerations, alignment with strategic direction of ICANN, aspects that are out of scope for the review, insufficient information about the finding or the recommendation,  and potential impact on another group.
  *   Does it make sense to do this before the public comment ends and we have the comment summary?  - Yes, public comments will be summarized by staff and considered by Westlake, in addition to the feedback from the GNSO Review Working Party.  Your opinion and feedback would provide Westlake with additional useful information to consider as they refine and finalize their report and recommendations.
  *   Am I correct that it would be helpful if we rate the feasibility and usefulness of the recommendation?  If so, how should we rate these two factors?  A common scale for all of us would be helpful. - In forming your opinion as to whether the recommendation should be accepted, modified or rejected, you would be considering whether the recommendation is feasible and useful.  A basis or rationale might include: cost/benefit considerations, alignment with strategic direction of ICANN, aspects that are out of scope for the review, insufficient information about the finding or the recommendation,  and potential impact on another group.

Best wishes,
Larisa


From: owner-gnso-review-dt at icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt at icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt at icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 1:20 PM
To: Charla Shambley; gnso-review-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-review-dt at icann.org>
Cc: richard at westlakegovernance.com<mailto:richard at westlakegovernance.com>; Colin Jackson (colin at westlakegovernance.com<mailto:colin at westlakegovernance.com>); Vaughan Renner
Subject: [gnso-review-dt] RE: GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public Session in Buenos Aires

Charla,

Before I enter comments in the Initial Assessment, I want to make sure I understand what is being requested.

*         Should we enter our opinion as to whether the recommendation should be 'accepted as is', 'accepted with modification', or 'rejected' along with our rationale?

*         Does it make sense to do this before the public comment ends and we have the comment summary?

*         Am I correct that it would be helpful if we rate the feasibility and usefulness of the recommendation?  If so, how should we rate these two factors?  A common scale for all of us would be helpful.

Chuck

From: owner-gnso-review-dt at icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt at icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt at icann.org] On Behalf Of Charla Shambley
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2015 1:12 PM
To: gnso-review-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-review-dt at icann.org>
Cc: richard at westlakegovernance.com<mailto:richard at westlakegovernance.com>; Colin Jackson (colin at westlakegovernance.com<mailto:colin at westlakegovernance.com>); Vaughan Renner
Subject: [gnso-review-dt] GNSO Review - Wiki, Doodle Poll and Public Session in Buenos Aires

Dear GNSO Review Working Party:

I hope this email finds you well after ICANN53!  Following up to Larisa's email which summarized your work in Buenos Aires and next steps, I wanted to point out a few items:


*        Staff has set up several wiki pages to capture comments from the Working Party and Staff on the feasibility and usefulness of the 36 recommendations.  See Initial Assessment of Recommendations<https://community.icann.org/display/GR2/Initial+Assessment+of+Recommendations>.  We have organized the recommendations by theme to coincide with the structure of the Draft Report.  Each recommendation has its own page (see Recommendation 1<https://community.icann.org/display/GR2/Recommendation+1> for example).  Please add your comments in the "Working Party" section (you must be logged in to the wiki in order to do so) and include your name or initials to your comments.



*        A doodle poll has been set up to schedule a Working Party call on 28, 29 or 30 July to consider community comments and prioritize draft recommendations.  Please click on the link to provide your availability: Doodle Poll<http://doodle.com/c686t94p7ph4rnec>.  I will close the poll by 8 July and send out an invitation for your calendar.


*        Relevant discussion for implementation planning - please see the summary of comments and responses<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15/msg00002.html> from the 24 June public session "AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting ICANN Accountability<https://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews>".

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Charla


Charla K. Shambley
Strategic Initiatives Program Manager
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA  90094
310-578-8921

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-review-dt/attachments/20150706/d154b803/attachment.html>


More information about the Gnso-review-dt mailing list