[Internal-cg] Charter comments summary

Alissa Cooper alissa at cooperw.in
Fri Aug 22 00:15:00 UTC 2014


I agree with Joe that “review” is better than “assess.” Otherwise I think
the charter is ready to go.

Thanks,
Alissa

On 8/19/14, 7:05 AM, "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com> wrote:

>     
>  This seems fine, just want to make sure that "assess" does not imply the need
> to respond to each point on why its taken on board or not.  Would "review"
> achieve the same end with less potential to misread?
>  
>  
>  
> On 8/19/2014 9:35 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>  
>  
>>  
>> This is a new version based on comments that I received during the call. The
>> changes from the version that I posted before the call are:
>> 
>> - add the word “independent” in front of the accountability requirement per
>> James’ request
>> - change “Internet community” to “global multi-stakeholder community” per
>> Russ’ off-line request that supported Richard Hill’s original comment
>> - add the requirement for the ICG to compile and assess also the input
>> received beyond the operational communities
>> 
>> Change bars are included.
>> 
>> As discussed on the call, this is the version that we plan to go ahead with.
>> If you have an issue with this version, please notify the ICG of this within
>> the next week, i.e., before end of business on Tuesday, August 26th.
>> 
>> Jari Arkko
>> 
>>  
>>   
>>  
>>  
>>   
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140821/8f11c971/attachment.html>


More information about the Internal-cg mailing list