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

Fri Jul 3 00:37:18 EEST 2015

Hi,
It sounds that the public comment period was extended to 8th july
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-07-02-en

Rafik
On Jul 3, 2015 3:36 AM, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I just made some changes to that papra.
>
> hope it makes sense now.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 02-Jul-15 10:12, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
> > 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
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150703/ec826e81/attachment.html>