SCCI - criteria proposed by the CCOICI

[Pedro de Perdigão Lana]

Hi Julf, thanks for sharing!

Most criteria seem great, but those on Principle 4 seemed a bit strange - I
agree with Manju on everything she wrote there, plus I would change the
last criteria item from "There is an agreement that the GNSO Council..." to
"There are mechanisms to guarantee that the GNSO Council...". The word
"sufficient" on Criteria 7 could also be changed to "reasonable" or
something along those lines, since sufficient sounds like, to me, a minimal
requirement to achieve something.

Cordially,

*Pedro de Perdigão Lana*
Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 <https://www.nic.br/>,  Pesquisador (GEDAI/UFPR
<https://www.gedai.com.br/>)
Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra),
Coordenação/Diretoria/EC @ ISOC Brasil <https://www.isoc.org.br/>, NCUC
<https://www.ncuc.org> & NCSG
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN), CC Brasil
<https://br.creativecommons.net/>.
Essa mensagem é restrita ao remetente e destinatário(s). Se recebida por
engano, favor responder informando o erro.


Em qui., 3 de abr. de 2025 às 08:24, Johan Helsingius <
00001963cc94b85a-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu> escreveu:

> Dear all,
>
> As one of the NCSG representatives in the GNSO SCCI (Standing Committee
> on Continuous Improvement), I would like to share the slides from
> the most recent meeting (2 April), as well as the criteria proposed by
> the CCOICI that the SCCI is asking SG/Cs to review and comment on (if
> needed).
>
> Slides:
>
> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/presentation/slides-scci-02apr25.pdf
>
> Criteria:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LrPzxmKxCq3BBlWTOazk7Rdu2s6_LUaWd1De-JCEN-o/edit?usp=sharing
>
> The criteria look reasonable and I don't have any issues with them.
>
>         Julf
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20250410/767e8421/attachment.htm>