<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.hoenzb
{mso-style-name:hoenzb;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I am also supportive of getting feedback on things like the role of NCAs. There are two reasons why I suggested a delay in doing that: 1) We agreed a couple
of meetings ago that we would get better responsiveness if we kept the 360 as simple as possible, including not making it too long; 2) the intent of this review was to deal with non-structural issues. We will need to eventually do a review on structure
and it would fit nicely there. Also, how many people really understand the role of NCAs except those of us who have been directly involved; I think it will require some education if we want to get much feedback.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Chuck<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>David Cake<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, June 05, 2014 3:55 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ron Andruff<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Stephane Van Gelder; Avri Doria; gnso-review-dt@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment Questions<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I very much agree with this. <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If we are not considering issues like the house structure, I am bemused as to why we would limit the review in such a way.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">David <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 6 Jun 2014, at 5:26 am, Ron Andruff <<a href="mailto:ra@dotsportllc.com">ra@dotsportllc.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Dear colleagues,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I find it interesting that 3 past GNSO Council Chairs and one current V Chair are all at the lead of this thread. Who would know better about the things that
could work better within Council?! Clearly, the GNSO can and should be a better functioning body than it is today.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I find myself coming down on the side of Avri’s and Stephane’s argument. This is indeed the 360, so why are we holding anything back from gaining better insight?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">To that end, if all options are on the table as suggested, why not take the temperature of the community to find out whether the bicameral structure is something
that community members want to keep, modify or dispense with? Seems like an appropriate question to raise if we want to determine where we go from here.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">My two cents…</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">RA</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Ron Andruff</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">dotSport LLC</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="http://www.lifedotsport.com/"><span style="color:#0563C1">www.lifedotsport.com</span></a></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org">mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>]<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Stephane Van Gelder<br>
<b>Sent:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Thursday, June 5, 2014 13:33<br>
<b>To:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Avri Doria<br>
<b>Cc:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:ntfy-gnso-review-dt@icann.org">ntfy-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment Questions</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">To me this discussion raises the larger point of what we want the 360 to accomplish.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">My answer: set the independent review up to write a concrete report on the changes the GNSO needs.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If others share this objective, then nothing should be off the table and the questionnaire should be sufficiently detailed to allow points related to the GNSO's structure to come to the surface.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">After all, ever since the bicameral structure was implemented, all I have ever heard on the GNSO is that it has a "structure problem".<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">That being the case, why would this group want to stay away from structure issues? That IS the issue!<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Stéphane Van Gelder<br>
Chairman and Managing Director/Fondateur<br>
<span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Milathan LTD</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">"Internet Intelligence - Strategic Advice"<span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><br>
</span><br>
T (FR): +33 (0)6 20 40 55 89<br>
T (UK): +44 (0)7583 457053<br>
Skype: SVANGELDER<br>
<a href="http://www.stephanevangelder.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color:#1155CC">www.Milathan.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">----------------<br>
Discover The Milathan Post on <a href="http://post.milathan.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">http://post.milathan.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 5 June 2014 16:10, Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">avri@acm.org</span></a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
I do not agree that structural elements should be off the table. But<br>
since this yet another top down exercise, I guess I will be frsustrated<br>
by SICs behavior yet again.<br>
<br>
Yes, I thought we were asking about the effectiveness of all the<br>
structures. If that is not for the purpose of structural review, then<br>
why bother?<br>
<span style="color:#888888"><br>
<span class="hoenzb">avri</span></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
On 05-Jun-14 15:55, WUKnoben wrote:<br>
><br>
> Well, I agree that we should not include structural issues following<br>
> what I've understood from the SICs intentions for the review this time.<br>
><br>
> Questions like this should be taken into consideration at least when<br>
> answering to Q #3<br>
><br>
> Best regards<br>
><br>
> Wolf-Ulrich<br>
><br>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Gomes, Chuck<br>
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 2:53 PM<br>
> To: Avri Doria ;<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">gnso-review-dt@icann.org</span></a><br>
> Subject: RE: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment Questions<br>
><br>
><br>
> I think the questions on NCAs are good but I see them as GNSO structural<br>
> issues that will involve more complexity. If we include structural<br>
> issues in the 360 this time around, I believe it will make it more<br>
> complex. I wonder if it would be better at a later date to do a 360 on<br>
> structural issues.<br>
><br>
> Chuck<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From:<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</span></a><br>
> [mailto:<a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</span></a>] On Behalf Of Avri Doria<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 7:03 PM<br>
> To:<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">gnso-review-dt@icann.org</span></a><br>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment Questions<br>
><br>
><br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> Both. I think we should evaluate whether the 3 NCAs are being allowed<br>
> to work to their best potential by the way they are apportioned.<br>
><br>
> I personally think the notion of a homeless voteless NCA is broken. But<br>
> that is just the opinion a one exNCA from before the 'improvements'.<br>
> This whole house arrangement is new, and some what radical. We should<br>
> check and see if the 360 thinks it is working, which includes its effect<br>
> on NCA positions.<br>
><br>
> avri<br>
><br>
><br>
> On 04-Jun-14 19:03, Ron Andruff wrote:<br>
>> Hi Avri,<br>
>><br>
>> Just for clarification, regarding the NCA and your comment about how<br>
>> they are apportioned, do you mean whether they should be<br>
>> voting/non-voting or do you think there should be more or less of<br>
>> them?<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks,<br>
>><br>
>> RA<br>
>><br>
>> Ron Andruff dotSport LLC<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.lifedotsport.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color:purple">www.lifedotsport.com</span></a><br>
>><br>
>> -----Original Message----- From:<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</span></a><br>
>> [mailto:<a href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</span></a>] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent:<br>
>> Wednesday, June 4, 2014 11:50 To:<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">gnso-review-dt@icann.org</span></a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Subject:<br>
>> Re: [gnso-review-dt] Additional input on 360 Assessment Questions<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> While the questions leave me unimpressed, they are ok.<br>
>><br>
>> What is missing in my opinion is a column for the GNSO Houses<br>
>><br>
>> Also is there any way the review could take into account the situation<br>
>> with NCAs? Do we think that they way they are being apportioned in<br>
>> the best. Perhaps a column referring to them as well could be useful.<br>
>><br>
>> avri<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>