[Gac-gnso-cg] Charter - Final version ..

[Manal Ismail]

Many thanks Mikey for the reminder ..

Like Ana, I see the merit behind the 'middle ground' option, which
implies some further commitment to ensure that our set of
recommendations works well in practice .. 

Yet, I see this more of a solution aspect rather than a charter one .. I
like the current focused mandate, limited timeline and suggested
milestones as stated in the charter .. When we come to compiling our
recommendations, we can then include one that stresses the need for
post-implementation assessment and fine tuning .. This assessment can be
done by this consultation group, a smaller group, a totally new one, a
mix of old and new members or any other options as agreed by then ..

Looking forward to hearing what other colleagues think ..  

Kind Regards
--Manal

-----Original Message-----
From: Ana Neves [mailto:Ana.Neves at fct.pt] 
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 4:21 PM
To: Mike O'Connor
Cc: Manal Ismail; gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Charter - Final version ..

Thanks, Mikey.

I world be in favour to the "middle ground" proposal for the timeline as
it would allow,?as you well said, a post-implementation assessment. What
we're trying to build here is not an easy task and could be very useful
to follow the process at least for 2 years.

My humble opinion at this stage...

Best, Ana

Sent from my iPhone

On 20/01/2014, at 13:01, "Mike O'Connor"
<mike at haven2.com<mailto:mike at haven2.com>> wrote:

there's one thing i forgot to add to that draft.

we had a discussion about how long this committee should last.  an idea
came to me this morning that would represent a middle option between two
extremes.

short extreme - we wrap up after our recommendations have been accepted
by the GAC and the GNSO

middle ground - we wrap up after our recommendations have gone through a
post-implementation assessment (1-2 years out)

long extreme - we continue on as a standing committee

i think part of the reason i forgot to add this to the "timeline"
section is because i wasn't clear what our view was - so maybe we could
have a quick discussion about this on the list before the meeting
tomorrow?

mikey


On Jan 20, 2014, at 6:35 AM, Manal Ismail
<manal at tra.gov.eg<mailto:manal at tra.gov.eg>> wrote:

Many thanks Mikey !!

We, Jonathan and I, have added the signing off of the charter to
tomorrow's conference call agenda, which I will be circulating shortly
..
Hope everyone will be ready to adopt the charter by then ..

Kind Regards
--Manal

From: Mike O'Connor [mailto:mike at haven2.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 3:07 PM
To: Manal Ismail; Marika Konings
Cc: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Charter - Final version ..

hi all,

oops - i didn't structure the action items in my notes from our last
call very well, so i didn't put a trigger in there reminding myself to
update and circulate the draft.

here's a draft for people to review, based on the notes from that call.

my mistake, sorry about that.

mikey



PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB:
www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for
Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

_______________________________________________
Gac-gnso-cg mailing list
Gac-gnso-cg at icann.org<mailto:Gac-gnso-cg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg