[PC-NCSG] URGENT: Pending NCSG Statements

[Rafik Dammak]

Hello ,

since the draft were sent few days ago , I think that PC members should
approve or object by today, we don't have so much time left .
please check the drafts quickly and tell us if you approve  or object that
the statements to be sent.

Best,

Rafik


2014-03-10 22:38 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org>:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks to those who have responded and showed support for the statements.
> Unfortunately, we only got responses from three out of ten NCSG-PC members.
> I don?t believe this qualifies as ?rough consensus? as defined in the NCSG
> charter.
>
> It?s rather a shame that NCSG members put their time into following these
> working groups and make an effort to draft comments when feedback is sought
> only to be ignored by the policy committee. I still believe it is important
> to submit the drafted comments, and so will seek endorsement by NCUC. I
> hope we have better luck with responses there than here.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> On Mar 7, 2014, at 5:30 PM, Stephanie Perrin <
> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>
> I have already supported the P/P questionnaire, and the EWG response, now
> I support the T&T position.  And thanks to all drafters!!!  the work never
> stops?.
> Stephanie
> On Mar 7, 2014, at 9:36 AM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Rudi,
>
> I?ve attached the three statements to this email, but unfortunately, we
> don?t have the luxury of waiting until we have an NCSG-PC call to review
> and submit them.The deadlines for these have already passed, and we?ve been
> asking for extensions for all of them. There has only been an update to one
> of them (Translation & Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG) based
> on Kathy?s feedback on the NCSG-list. They?re the same comments Chris
> Dillon walked us through during the WG call yesterday. Could you and others
> please give feedback on this list?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> <NCSG Response to T&T of Contact Info PDP WG Questions.doc>
> <NCSGResponsetoQuestionsfromProxyPrivacyAccrediationWG.docx
> (00629345).docx>
> <Comments of the NCSG to EWG Status Report March 2014.docx>
>
> On Mar 7, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at ISOC.BE> wrote:
>
> I agree we need to start do some work in NCSG-PC. Can we have a link to
> the statements as they are today so we do not use wrong ones ?
> I would call on the NCSG-PC chair to schedule an online meeting so we can
> validate NCSG-PC positions on this.
>
> Kind regards,
>
>  Rudi Vansnick
> NPOC chair Policy Committee
> NPOC treasurer
> rudi.vansnick at npoc.org
> Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16
> Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32
> www.npoc.org
>
> Op 7-mrt.-2014, om 12:16 heeft Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> Hi Amr,
>
> thanks for the reminder, NCSG PC members should review and indicate their
> support or not to the statements. we have statements but they are waiting
> approval!
> I asked for extension for the PPSAI questionnaire but I don't think that
> we can take more than one week to respond.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> 2014-03-06 18:52 GMT+09:00 Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I don?t enjoy nagging, but there are three statements currently awaiting
>> NCSG-PC endorsement:
>>
>> 1. NCSG response to the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues
>> PDP WG
>> 2. NCSG response to the gTLD Registration Data Services EWG status update
>> report
>> 3. NCSG response to the Translation and Transliteration of Contact
>> Information PDP WG
>>
>> The response to the EWG can always be sent as an individual statement
>> endorsed by whoever cares to sign it, but the responses to the two PDP WGs
>> needs to be endorsed by either an SO, an AC, a SG or a constituency. These
>> are very important statements that constitute the NCSG's official
>> contribution to PDP WGs, and it would be a shame if we don?t declare a
>> position on them only because we fail to endorse statements already drafted.
>>
>> I urge you all to read through all three of the statements, ask questions
>> or suggest changes, then either indicate that you support or don?t support
>> them.
>>
>> Note: There are still more requests for input pending that have not yet
>> been drafted including the Policy and Implementation WG (a non-PDP WG) and
>> the IRTP-D initial report. Not sure if I missed any.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Amr
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20140310/6615daae/attachment-0001.html>