[PC-NCSG] URGENT: Pending NCSG Statements

Mon Mar 10 18:05:44 EET 2014

is there a convenient place to find these?

avri

On 10-Mar-14 09:38, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> 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
> <mailto: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
>> <mailto: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
>>> <mailto: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 <mailto:rudi.vansnick at npoc.org>
>>>> Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16
>>>> Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32
>>>> www.npoc.org <http://www.npoc.org/>
>>>>
>>>> Op 7-mrt.-2014, om 12:16 heeft Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>> <mailto: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 <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>>>>>     http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto: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
>