[Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

Tue Jan 21 17:17:55 UTC 2014

To add tho this conversation, I believe the reason why some are using the
BoF term in an ICANN context is because it is a standard part of the process
in the IETF (see http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc5434) and as such some have
suggested that a similar format should be explored to encourage
conversations in an ICANN context before kicking off a formal PDP.

Best regards,

Marika

From:  "<Campillos Gonzalez>", Gema Maria <GCAMPILLOS at minetur.es>
Date:  Tuesday 21 January 2014 17:10
To:  Olof Nordling <olof.nordling at icann.org>, Jonathan Robinson
<jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com>, "GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org"
<GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org>
Subject:  Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

Thank you, Olof. I´m learning English very quickly with you, but as I´ve
just to Jonathan we should rather look for another more straightforward term
to say the same. 
Best,

Gema

De: Olof Nordling [mailto:olof.nordling at icann.org]
Enviado el: martes, 21 de enero de 2014 16:35
Para: Jonathan Robinson; Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria;
GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Asunto: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

Gema, Jonathan, 
I¹ve seen BOF being used in the RIRs with the meaning ³those interested in a
particular topic² without necessarily agreeing a priori on any aspects of
that topic. Just to illustrate on an anecdotal note, a late night ³Whisky
BOF² would gather those interested in that particular beverage to consume,
debate and disagree on their brand preferences;-)
Cheers 
Olof 

From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On
Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 2:44 PM
To: 'Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria'; GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

Thanks Gema, 

Useful input and I am especially mindful of the need to use plain, simple
language for the benefit of all, including English speakers.  So support for
that. 

To the point on birds of a feather.  BOF has the dictionary meaning you
highlight and is, in my experience, generally applied as a comment by a
third party to a group of others referred to as ³birds of a feather².
In this context, the meaning is slightly different in that it generally
seems to be applied to an invitation to individuals to form a group.  Others
may be more familiar with the use in policy making / ICANN context.

Jonathan 

From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On
Behalf Of Campillos Gonzalez, Gema Maria
Sent: 21 January 2014 13:33
To: GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

Thank you for the draft list of definitions, Jonathan.

It´s quite revealing to know that ³GNSO consensus policies² and at large,
ICANN consensus policies are not policies struck at necessarily by consensus
(agreement) but, rather, with the participation of all stakeholders. The
term encompasses a process to pass policies which is described at Annex A
of the Bylaws and the PDP Manual and which specifies several majority
options to approve policies- and a list of matters on which a PDP is
feasible, which are included in the sections called ³consensus policies and
temporary policies² in the Registrar and Registry agreements with ICANN.

One last remark pertaining to the ³GAC engagement on the GNSO Policy
Development Process² table: the dictionaries I´ve looked up explain that
³birds of a feather² is part of a proverb which means that people who think
alike or belong to the same class or have similar habits end up being
friends or a team. That leads me to think that when the table uses this
expression is thinking of an homogenous group of GAC members, what would be
out of any logic since the GNSO would only have the vision of like-minded
members of the GAC. Please, tell me if my understanding is correct.

A more general request I would make is to try to use plain simple English
being mindful of the difficulties and misunderstandings language may cause
in non-native speakers, as I´ve seen the ATRT 2 report advises.

I hope you have a fruitful call.

Best regards, 

Gema 

De:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] En
nombre de Jonathan Robinson
Enviado el: martes, 21 de enero de 2014 12:23
Para: GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Asunto: [Gac-gnso-cg] Early work of the GNSO Policy & Implemenation WG

All, 

One of the many parallel threads going on is the work being undertaken by
the Policy & Implementation WG.

They have undertaken some initial work on common understanding of
definitions which is nearing a final draft form.
I believe you may well find it helpful background to read through the draft
definitions (Attached).

N.B. 

These working definitions have been developed for the  limited use by the
GNSO Policy & Implementation Working Group to facilitate their discussions
and deliberations on the questions outlined in the working group¹s charter.
These definitions are expected to evolve as a result of the WG
deliberations. At the end of the process, the WG is expected to review these
definitions, add/update as deemed appropriate and include them in the Final
Report. 

Thanks. 

Jonathan 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20140121/d3e55fc7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5056 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20140121/d3e55fc7/smime.p7s>