[Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] For final review - revised working principles document

[Nic Steinbach]

Hi Chuck,

I think that while these provisions contain similar language, in context
they seem to be referring to different principles.

C. 1.) b) - Seems to be referring to the *development of policy*.

The "development should be based on principles of fairness, notice,
transparency and due process as well as predictability."

D. 1.) c.) - Seems to be referring to the *application of policy*.

"Applying documented policies neutrally and objectively, with integrity and
fairness."

I don't think that these are duplicates, although we may want to make sure
that D.1.) c.) makes reference to implementation explicitly instead of
"applying documented policies."

Alternatively we could roll both of these provisions into section B
(Principles that apply to policy and implementation) and remove them from
C. and D.

Something like:

"Policy development and implementation should be based on and adhere to
principles of fairness, notice, transparency, integrity, objectivity,
predictability and due process."

My preference is to roll them together into section C.

Best,

Nic


On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:

>  Sorry about forgetting to attach the file.  Here it is.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> *From:* Gomes, Chuck
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 23, 2014 8:21 PM
> *To:* 'Marika Konings'; 'gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl at icann.org'
> *Subject:* RE: [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] For final review - revised
> working principles document
>
>
>
> You guys did great work last Thursday.  The principles document looks very
> good and the organization of it seems very clear and logical to me.  Other
> than one think that is repeated as shown with two comments in the attached
> file, it looks very close to being  ready to send to the full WG.  I am
> assuming that our agenda for our call this coming Thursday will be to make
> any final tweaks, after which we would send it to the full WG so that they
> can review it before the WG call on 5 March.  Is that correct?
>
>
>
> What is the thinking with regard to the Notes to Pass Back to the WG?  Is
> the assumption that we do not need to develop any principles for these
> items?  What expectations for the WG are there?
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Marika
> Konings
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 20, 2014 5:27 PM
> *To:* gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl] For final review - revised working
> principles document
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> Following our call today, please find attached the revised version of the
> working principles document, both in redline (capturing the changes of
> today's meeting) as well as a clean version (with a separate annex covering
> 'notes to the WG'). As those sub-team members that were on the call are of
> the view that this is now ready for submission to the full WG, you are
> encouraged to let the mailing list know if you disagree with this
> assessment and/or share any additional edits / comments you may have.
>
>
>
> If no substantive comments are received *by Wednesday 26 March*, the
> proposed working principles will be submitted to the full WG for review and
> discussion at its next meeting on 5 March.
>
>
>
> Thanks for all your hard work!
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Marika
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl mailing list
> Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl
>



-- 
*Nic Steinbach*
Strategic Relationship Manager
209.681.7838
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl/attachments/20140224/65dad9b4/attachment.html>