[Wp4] Agenda for our call

[Greg Shatan]

As Tanya requested, I've uploaded the clean version of the document
circulated last night to Google Drive.  Here is the link:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bm0NnIq35j3-EwmBwKEjSOJia-c10wv0mhHytngTDiM/edit?usp=sharing

Greg

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Dr. Tatiana Tropina <t.tropina at mpicc.de>
wrote:

> Hi Greg,
> thanks a lot for providing this starting point for the rationale document
> and for pointing out that we have to proceed with what is meant to be
> "explanatory" document for the bylaw language. Would it be possible to
> share this new draft (clean version) as a Google doc, so anyone can work on
> it after (and during, may be) the call? I think Google docs were really
> helpful in our previous work. Only if you have time to do this, of course.
> Thanks a million!
> I also believe that we might consider changing the structure of the part
> which was meant to be the rationale document (the text from the old Google
> doc). I remember there were some comments and suggestion for
> amending/restructuring this "rationale" part in the Google doc itself and
> on the WP4 calls.  However, this can be discussed during the call. Or any
> time later.
> Looking forward to the call.
> Cheers
> Tanya
>
> On 30/10/15 08:04, Greg Shatan wrote:
>
> All,
>
> As promised, here is the document I propose as the starting point for our
> drafting.  Since the portion where I edited down the comment analysis is
> difficult to read in the marked version, I've also included a clean version.
>
> I look forward to our call.
>
> Greg
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Leon and all,
>>
>> On point 3, I don't understand why we would be adding to or amending the
>> Second Public Comment document.  This document has now been published as
>> part of the CCWG's overall review of the public comments.  I think this
>> document is pretty much closed.
>>
>> On the other hand, we were working on a rationale document in a Google
>> Doc before the public comment analysis and then Dublin took over our
>> lives.  I think what we need to do is work on a document that uses as its
>> starting point (i) the second draft report section on human rights, (ii)
>> pieces of the rationale document, (iii) a fairly brief discussion/analysis
>> of the comments and (iv) the new material provided by Leon.  The ultimate
>> goal should be to turn this into the human rights section of the next draft
>> of the report.  I've been working on such a document and should have a
>> draft shortly.  I won't have it as far along as I'd hoped, due to a medical
>> emergency in my family, but hopefully it will be far enough along to give a
>> sense of where it could go.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 3:29 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <
>> <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> In anticipation for our call, I suggest the following agenda:
>>>
>>> 1. Welcome
>>> 2. Explanation by Paul Twomey on practical steps involved in changes of
>>> TLD operator (focused on ccTLD)
>>> 3. Review of proposed addition to our PC2 document
>>> 4 AOB
>>>
>>> Of course, and as usual, this agenda is a suggestion and open for
>>> amendments.
>>>
>>> Staff,
>>>
>>> Please be ready to display the document in the AC room.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> León
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wp4 mailing list
>>> Wp4 at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wp4 mailing listWp4 at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp4/attachments/20151030/85c4db12/attachment.html>