[PC-NCSG] Draft comments to the AoC/Organisational review schedule public comment
Amr Elsadr
aelsadr
Mon Jul 6 15:44:09 EEST 2015
I think so too.
Thanks.
Amr
On Jul 5, 2015, at 11:23 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> good idea
>
> avri
>
> On 05-Jul-15 17:20, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> while we got the extension to 8th july, I assume there was no changes
>> in the latest version. I will submit the comment today to close this task.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> 2015-07-03 6:37 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>:
>>
>> 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
>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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
>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> 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 <mailto: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
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list