[PC-NCSG] Draft comments to the AoC/Organisational review schedule public comment

Thu Jul 2 17:45:21 EEST 2015

Hi,

thanks for the edits. I went through the document to resolve edits/comments
and format it. it sounds ready now, except for that question made by
Stephanie.
The document is ready for submission. I am waiting for next hours to see if
there is any objection and I will send it just before the deadline and that
will be in 9 hours (it is almost midnight here, so if you make substantial
changes or edits, I will need time to resolve that.

Best,

Rafik

2015-07-02 23:12 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>:

> I put some comments/edits in the document, there is one para that several
> of us have queried that is still awkward (I cannot figure out quite what we
> are trying to say) so would suggest the author take another look at it to
> try to simplify it....review on review after review etc.
> Thanks for the opportunity and kudos to the authors, especially James for
> initiating!  So much to do at the moment.....
> Stephanie
>
>
> On 2015-07-02 8:20, Amr Elsadr wrote:
>
>> Thanks Ed. That?s really helpful. I can?t argue with any of your
>> rationale, especially regarding the organisational reviews. I would
>> personally probably also endorse a statement pointing out your views. The
>> only issues I have a strong opinion on here are probably the ATRT and WHOIS
>> review.
>>
>> I very much take Avri?s point to heart. If initiation of ATRTs are
>> delayed because there are too many moving parts in ICANN, they?ll never get
>> done.
>>
>> Thanks again.
>>
>> Amr
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2015, at 1:48 PM, Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net> wrote:
>>
>>  Hi Amr.
>>>
>>> I've modified my views a bit after thinking a bit about the impact of
>>> the accountability reforms on the SOAC's. All of these groups could be very
>>> different creatures depending upon the form accountability will take. Will
>>> they become legal persons? If so, charters will need to be redone and, in
>>> some cases, created. Will there be accountability requirements imposed upon
>>> the groups? If so, we may be reviewing an organization much different than
>>> what it is to become. I'm not sure how valuable a review would be in that
>>> case.
>>>
>>> Initially I was going to suggest a postponement of the ATRT reviews as
>>> well, but a post by Avri where she wrote that something was always going on
>>> in ICANN-land (my words, not hers) and stressed the importance of the
>>> Accountability reviews caused me to reconsider.
>>>
>>> If we are going ahead with the org reviews I do think at large should go
>>> first because it arguably has the most to reform and is larger than the
>>> other two.
>>>
>>> I'm happy to support a statement with views different than my own
>>> because there are a number of reasonable positions on this matter. There is
>>> a lot more in the proposed submission that I agree with than not - my own
>>> views were submitted in a personal comment so will be represented in the
>>> staff report - so do support submission in whatever way you deem
>>> appropriate.
>>>
>>> Ed
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>  On Jul 2, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Ed. Appreciate the support despite some difference in views? Can
>>>> I ask why you believe org reviews should be halted? I thought you wanted
>>>> (at least) for the At-Large review to not be delayed?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again.
>>>>
>>>> Amr
>>>>
>>>>  On Jul 1, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My views are a bit different than those in the document: basically
>>>>> halt organizational reviews until the ACCT bylaws changes are done but
>>>>> proceed with the ATRT reviews, albeit possibly on a more relaxed schedule.
>>>>> If the organizational reviews are to go forward I would prioritize the at
>>>>> large review given the relative importance of the group to proposed reforms.
>>>>>
>>>>> That said, I have no strong objection to the document as is and there
>>>>> is a lot of good stuff in it. Happy for it to go forward if others support
>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>  On Jul 1, 2015, at 9:05 AM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the reminder, Rafik. Now would be a good time to start
>>>>>> getting comments/endorsements for this. We will need to submit it before
>>>>>> July 2nd, UTC 23:59.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am generally supportive of the document, but have some concerns.
>>>>>> The main one is recommending another WHOIS review at this time when the
>>>>>> post-EWG PDP will be starting. It doesn?t make much sense to me to perform
>>>>>> a WHOIS review when the WHOIS may change significantly. Also not sure how
>>>>>> many volunteers would want to focus on working with a WHOIS review team
>>>>>> while the post-EWG PDP is going on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Amr
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  On Jul 1, 2015, at 1:59 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> this is a reminder about the comment to be submitted by NCSG.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2015-06-29 13:43 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we got this comment initiated by James
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LLCWNYombphjN5Pxob4IVEXNMjyuNim8YPUNCQVdx3g/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>> and which received some edits. please review it so NCSG PC can endorse it .
>>>>>>> the deadline is 2nd July 23:59.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> so please review, comments and help with edits.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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/20150702/d083b8fd/attachment.html>