[atrt2] Comment from reading the sections of Draft #3 (Clean)

Brian Cute bcute at pir.org
Mon Dec 30 03:19:25 UTC 2013


Thanks again Avri.  This should be the last of it.

Best,
Brian

On 12/29/13 5:00 PM, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>
>Mostly trivial things I noticed.
>
>While these come from reading the text, one of the observations points
>out a wording defect in one of the recommendations (9.3.B).  I do not
>think the recommended fix changes the meeting of the recommendation.
>
>It is a good report.  Though at times reading things I 'held the pen'
>for, I wish I had done a better job.
>
>avri
>
>
>~ Page 13
>
>In the course of its deliberations, ATRT1 found that the Nominating
>Committee (NomCom) had failed to implement previous recommendations
>from, did not have
>
>(never says from when the recommendations were not taken.  Maybe the
>from is a superfluous word?)
>
>
>~ page 25 (the 9.3 b issue)
>
>In the course of its deliberations, ATRT1 found that the Nominating
>Committee (NomCom) had failed to implement previous recommendations
>from, did not have
>
>Yet in recommendation 9.3 B we say administrative function instead of
>administration or administrative matters.
>
>2 instances page 7 and 59 'administrative function' should be changed to
>'administration'
>
>
>~ page 32
>
>, the idea of "reverse" liaisons from ACs and SOs, as well as a Board
>liaison to the GAC
>
>(nowhere do we define reverse liaisons. perhaps a footnote. I know
>comments are supposed to include text, but in this case, I don't know
>how to define it.  The closest I can get is "reverse liaison: a liaison
>from a group with which the GAC does have a By-Laws defined
>relationship.")
>
>
>~ page 45
>
>The effectiveness of implementation is qualified, but its partial
>success is not entirely due to staff performance. .
>
>(double period)
>
>~ page 46
>
>During calls72  with ATRT2,
>
>(footnote indicator in wrong font)
>
>~ Page 53
>
>in fact ran counter to the concept of accountability.83
>
>[Multistakeholder Model].²84
>
>(footnote indicators in wrong font)
>
>~ Page 60
>
>Report Section 12. Assessment of ATRT2 Recommendation 21
>
>
>(should that be ATRT1 Recommendation?)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>atrt2 mailing list
>atrt2 at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2



More information about the atrt2 mailing list