[PC-NCSG] URGENT: Pending NCSG Statements

Amr Elsadr aelsadr
Tue Mar 11 17:56:11 EET 2014


+1

Amr

On Mar 11, 2014, at 4:24 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> Given lack of engagement, we should discuss if this practice makes sense or if it is unduly hampering the SG's ability to get its work done:
> 
>> - At least one person (other than me - as alt-chair i tried to be more NCSG neutral than NCUC) from each Constituency says 'for it.'
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 11, 2014, at 7:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> 
>> For the last year I tried to interpret/implement it as:
>> 
>> - It has been floated on the NCSG discuss
>> 
>> - At least one person (other than me - as alt-chair i tried to be more NCSG neutral than NCUC) from each Constituency says 'for it.'
>> 
>> - No one was screaming against
>> 
>> - and a 24-48+ hours 'speak now if you object'  last call had been held
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 11-Mar-14 09:48, Amr Elsadr wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Thanks Rafik. I would appreciate hearing views on wether NCSG-PC members
>>> feel that we have achieved rough consensus, or not. I?m a little
>>> confused by how ?rough consensus? is defined in the NCSG charter. It
>>> states that:
>>> 
>>> /"while all members do not need to agree and that no single member can
>>> veto a decision, all views must be heard and considered. Any minority
>>> views must be recorded along with the rough consensus position."/
>>> 
>>> This definition doesn?t exactly make it easy in the event that no view
>>> is provided at all. It also does not clearly define a period of time or
>>> deadlines for response. Does no view at this point = no objection? If it
>>> does, then I would like to go ahead and ask the NCSG Chair or the
>>> NCSG-PC Chair to submit the statements as NCSG statements. If not, I
>>> would like to know so that I could proceed to attempt to seek NCUC
>>> endorsement.
>>> 
>>> I have attached the latest drafts to this email.
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> Amr
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mar 11, 2014, at 2:12 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Maria,
>>>> 
>>>> I suggested y to get views from PC members by monday since we need to
>>>> send the drafts and know if PC members approve or disagree with
>>>> statements.
>>>> is it possible to make the last call and get response from the PC
>>>> members who didn't respond?
>>>> Thanks to Avri, Stephanie, Amr and you who replied already.
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> Rafik
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 2014-03-07 23:58 GMT+09:00 Maria Farrell <maria.farrell at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:maria.farrell at gmail.com>>:
>>>> 
>>>>   Hi everyone,
>>>> 
>>>>   Thanks so much to the drafters of these excellent positions. I
>>>>   personally support all of them and am sorry that my workload this
>>>>   week has been too frantic to allow me to contribute.
>>>> 
>>>>   I just spotted a typo and one textual ambiguity in the privacy and
>>>>   proxy document, details attached below in bold and strikethrough,
>>>>   if there is time to revise them. (but these two points are not
>>>>   deal breakers if there is not time.)
>>>> 
>>>>   All the best, Maria
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   On 7 March 2014 14:36, 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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>       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 <tel:%2B32%20%280%299%20329%2039%2016>
>>>>>       Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32
>>>>>       <tel:%2B32%20%280%29475%2028%2016%2032>
>>>>>       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 <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
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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





More information about the NCSG-PC mailing list