[Internal-cg] FAQ update ..
manal at tra.gov.eg
Tue Nov 25 11:30:07 UTC 2014
Thank you Wolf-Ulrich ..
I thought this point is already covered and, in fact, is the focus of Q#16 ..
Would you still like to have it added to Q#15 too?
From: WUKnoben [mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:57 PM
To: Manal Ismail; internal-cg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] FAQ update ..
Thanks very much Manal. I agree with Kavouss to amend the already published FAG accordingly asap.
I’m ok with it but have a slight amendment to #15 (Board’s role) inserted.
From: Manal Ismail <mailto:manal at tra.gov.eg>
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 10:13 AM
To: internal-cg at icann.org
Subject: [Internal-cg] FAQ update ..
Dear All ..
I have paused our FAQ discussions based on what Alissa suggested, in her email dated 27 October, 2014:
"I think beyond the FAQ text (and probably before we add the new text to the FAQ web site), the main thing we need to agree on as the ICG is the full list of what our plans, requirements, and expectations are vis a vis the proposal submission process."
Yet, before we lose track, I'm attaching (also on Dropbox) a version, dated 24Nov14, which I hope accurately reflects all previous discussions .. I suggest that, as we have agreed that the FAQ is going to be a living document, that we do not delay its posting pending finalization of discussions on all questions .. As a living document, it's hard to have a complete perfect version all the time .. Additionally, the FAQ has to provide timely information and some questions are more urgent than others .. So my suggestion is that, as we continue discussion on the Board role, if the current answer is still unsatisfactory to some, we can proceed with other updates such as Q#19 on whether the target deadline has been delayed, and Q#22 on the relationship between the ICG work and the ICANN accountability process ..
If acceptable, I would hence suggest that ICG members skim through the track changes and identify any questions were there are still concerns or uncompleted discussions .. We can then halt updates concerning those specific questions and proceed with the rest ..
I think we should also have some way to highlight new or modified questions as well as the date of last update, on the online version ..
How does this sound?
Looking forward to receiving your views and any other suggestions for better ways forward ..
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg