<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>Congratulations to the successful appointees, wonderful news.</p>
    <p>Those suggested Board topics look good, thanks Stephanie</p>
    <p>Joy Liddicoat<br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/10/2020 9:53 am, Olivier Kouami
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAE0gvYAo=bJaCQoung4=C+XeEyh=MgthjukuVzcPGt53Nr=9Sw@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="auto">Congratulations to all the appointees.
        <div dir="auto">They deserve it. </div>
        <div dir="auto">Keep up the great work.</div>
        <div dir="auto">Kudo !</div>
        <div dir="auto">Warm regards</div>
        <div dir="auto">Olévié</div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr">Le sam. 3 oct. 2020 à 14:19, Stephanie E Perrin
          <<a href="mailto:stephanie@digitaldiscretion.ca"
            moz-do-not-send="true">stephanie@digitaldiscretion.ca</a>>
          a écrit :<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
          .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
          <div>
            <p>Congratulations to all those appointed yesterday by the
              Nomcom, it is particularly great news to see Avri Doria
              and Sara Deutsch reappointed to the Board, and of current
              Councillor James Gannon to the PTI Board.   <a
                href="https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2020-10-02-en"
                target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2020-10-02-en.
                .  <br>
              </a></p>
            <p>While I have your attention, may I please remind you that
              we have to have proposals for topics to discuss withe the
              Board by Monday.  So far, noone has proposed anything
              except Kathy Kleiman, who thinks (as I do) that a
              discussion of the new google format for seeking comments
              may be a good topic.  I don't know about the rest of you,
              but I find this new format, while helpful to staff in
              compiling comments, restricts the ambit of comment and may
              lead to bias. It is also a nightmare to navigate, in my
              opinion, having had a difficult time following the EPDP
              comments.  I am about to review the comment on Sub Pro
              (Here is the form:
              <a
href="https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-draft-final-report-2020-08-20-en"
                target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-draft-final-report-2020-08-20-en</a>)
              and I expect it to be a painful experience as well.  Don't
              let my grumbling deter you though, please take a look at
              what has been submitted on this important topic, available
              here
              <a
href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VOCuHrCIWc3D9aJV2-woOob8atmg6o20AzE7NMse5CE/edit#gid=472588409"
                target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VOCuHrCIWc3D9aJV2-woOob8atmg6o20AzE7NMse5CE/edit#gid=472588409</a>.<br>
            </p>
            <p>In the absence of other suggestions coming from members,
              I am going to propose discussing the results of ICANN
              investment and participation in the Internet and
              Jurisdiction project.  Members may be aware that ICANN has
              participated at the Board level in this interesting work,
              and while I have no figures for the financial investment,
              it must be significant, judging from the level of
              participation of staff and the Board.  The problem of
              jurisdiction and choice of law remains one of those hardy
              perennials, we certainly had it arise in the context of
              the EPDP, and the recent Schrems II decision
              (<a
href="https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-07/cp200091en.pdf"
                target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-07/cp200091en.pdf</a>)
              and the US White Paper response to that decision
              (<a
href="https://www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/SCCsWhitePaperFORMATTEDFINAL508COMPLIANT.PDF"
                target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/SCCsWhitePaperFORMATTEDFINAL508COMPLIANT.PDF</a>)
              brings the issue of transborder dataflow back into focus. 
              I realize this is not everyone's interest, but it is mine,
              and if you are not going to suggest anything, this is what
              I propose to inquire about.</p>
            <p>Kind regards. <br>
            </p>
            <p>Stephanie Perrin</p>
            <p>NCSG Chair<br>
            </p>
            <p><br>
            </p>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Joy Liddicoat
@internetrights</pre>
  </body>
</html>