[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Announcement: No Working Group call this week

Wed Dec 20 15:00:07 UTC 2017

Dear Mary,

Please note that I fully support the email from George posted Tue Dec 19
23:35:58 UTC 2017

No poll should be anonymous.  In every WG I have been involved in that uses
Polls the participant must:

State their full name
Confirm membership
Confirm their understanding that only full members may participate
Confirm that any response is public and will be retained as part of the
official WG record and be subject to inspection by anyone.

In the face of such historical use and the authority cited by George, I
continue to object to the use of anonymous polling.

As I have previously expressed, polls are useful when compliant as they
allow participation by those not able to attend the telephone call due to
conflicts.

I ask the Chairs to reverse their apparent course of action and undertake
things properly in an open and transparent manner.

Please kindly confirm receipt and that this email will be included in the WG
records.

Sincerely,

Paul Raynor Keating, Esq.

Law.es <http://law.es/>

Tel. +34 93 368 0247 (Spain)

Tel. +44.7531.400.177 (UK)
Tel. +1.415.937.0846 (US)

Fax. (Europe) +34 93 396 0810

Fax. (US)(415) 358.4450

Skype: Prk-Spain

email:  Paul at law.es

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY CONTAIN
INFORMATION SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGE.  THE
INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM
IT IS ADDRESSED.  IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, NO WAIVER OF
PRIVILEGE IS MADE OR INTENDED AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO  PLEASE DELETE THE
EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENTS.

Circular 230 Disclosure: To assure compliance with Treasury Department rules
governing tax practice, we hereby inform you that any advice contained
herein (including in any attachment) (1) was not written or intended to be
used, and cannot be used, by you or any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding
any penalties that may be imposed on you or any taxpayer and (2) may not be
used or referred to by you or any other person in connection with promoting,
marketing or recommending to another person any transaction or matter
addressed herein.

NOTHING CONTAINED IN THIS EMAIL SHALL CONSTITUTE THE FORMATION OF AN
ATTORNEY/CLIENT RELATIONSHIP; SUCH A RELATIONSHIP MAY BE FORMED WITH THIS
FIRM AND ATTORNEY ONLY BY SEPARATE FORMAL WRITTEN ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT,
WHICH THIS IS NOT.  IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH AN AGREEMENT, NOTHING CONTAINED
HEREIN SHALL CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE

From:  Gnso-igo-ingo-crp <gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of
Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>
Date:  Wednesday, December 20, 2017 at 12:10 AM
To:  "gnso-igo-ingo-." <gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
Subject:  [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Announcement: No Working Group call this week

> Dear all,
>  
> As no requests to hold a call this week have been made, please note that there
> will not be a Working Group call this Thursday 21 December. We will resume our
> discussions in January, in accordance with the timeline outlined by the
> co-chairs (below).
>  
> The co-chairs have also reviewed the use of polls by the Next-Generation
> Registration Directory Services (RDS) PDP Working Group, since this was
> brought up during recent mailing list discussions on polling. Phil and Petter
> believe that the circumstances surrounding the decision to not utilize
> anonymous polling by the RDS Working Group are substantially different from
> the situation in our Working Group.
>  
> In this case, they believe that an anonymous poll  with all results to be
> published to the full Working Group except for the identity of the respondent
>  will encourage greater participation and more candid responses, which will
> help guide their initial designation of the options for Recommendation 3
> (although the expectation is that Recommendations 1, 2, and 4 are likely to
> continue to have at least consensus support).
>  
> Finally, please note that once the co-chairs¹ initial designations are
> published to the WG in January, all further discussion within the WG will be
> identified with those providing input and feedback.
>  
> Thanks and cheers, and wishing everyone happy holidays from the ICANN staff
> supporting your work,
> Mary
>  
> 
> From: Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>
> Date: Monday, December 18, 2017 at 11:46
> To: "gnso-igo-ingo-." <gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
> Subject: PLEASE READ: Co-Chairs' proposal for moving forward to determining
> consensus
> 
>  
> 
> The following email is being sent on behalf of Philip Corwin & Petter
> Rindforth (WG co-chairs).
>  
>  
> It is the view of the co-chairs that our exhaustive discussion of the options
> for dealing with the potential situation of an IGO successfully asserting an
> immunity claim in a judicial context have reached an end point; that all
> issues relevant to our Charter have been raised, understood and discussed; and
> that further discussion is unlikely to yield additional options that enjoy
> consensus support, or sway the view of Working Group participants regarding
> which option should prevail.
>  
> Therefore, the co-chairs intend to proceed in the following manner:
>  
> * If a significant number of WG members believe that further oral discussion
> of the three additional options that will be presented in a final consensus
> call is needed, supplementing the three that were presented for WG
> consideration in our preliminary consensus call held in October 2017, and that
> email list discussion is insufficient for WG members to understand the intent
> and effect of all six options to be included in the consensus call, we will
> hold a WG meeting on December 21st at our regular time. Please respond to the
> mailing list if you believe a call on December 21st is needed.
>  
> * On December 22nd, a second poll will be sent to all WG members. The purpose
> of this poll is to assist the co-chairs in determining the level of
> support/opposition that each option enjoys. This poll will ask all WG members
> to designate one of the six options as their preferred choice for addressing
> the IGO immunity issue. WG members will also be provided with means to add
> comments regarding that preferred choice, as well as each of the other five
> options. These comments can indicate support or opposition for each of the
> options, as well as whatever additional views a WG members wishes to provide.
> Responses to this poll will be anonymous, although any WG member will be free
> to share his/her response on the WG email list. The poll will remain open
> until Friday January 5th, 2018. The aggregated results of the poll, as well as
> all comments, will be shared with all WG members and will be included as a
> section of our Final Report.
>  
> * Once the poll closes, the co-chairs will review all responses and then share
> their views with WG members regarding the level of consensus that each option
> enjoys. We hope to hold the first meeting of the WG on January 11th, 2018 in
> order to discuss poll results and the co-chairs¹ evaluation. The GNSO WG
> Guidelines provide all WG members with an opportunity to provide feedback on
> those proposed classifications, and the final consensus level for each option
> included in the Final Report will be determined under the procedure provided
> in the Guidelines. As soon as that process is completed we will publish a
> draft Final Report for WG review and comment, and will provide a reasonable
> time for all WG members to draft and submit Minority views. We will try to
> have our Final Report ready for submission to the GNSO Council in order to
> meet the February 12th, 2018 document submission deadline, at the latest, for
> its February 22nd meeting.
>  
> Please let us know if you have any questions about this procedure. Thank you.
>  
> _______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20171220/4c5919d5/attachment-0001.html>