[PC-NCSG] Reconsideration

[Kathy Kleiman]

Tx to Ed and Phil!    +1 to Sam, Tapani comments.
Good luck and let's please file on time (as recon requests are dismissed 
for being late).
Best,
Kathy

On 10/12/2015 12:19 PM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> Agreed. I very much believe in following due process,
> Sam's got it exactly right.
> And getting this kind of thing done in cooperation
> with the BC is really something.
>
> Great work, Ed!
>
> Tapani
>
> On Oct 12 10:20, Sam Lanfranco (lanfran at yorku.ca) wrote:
>
>> I am in support of this.
>>
>> /Issue: The BC and NCSG believe that all members of the ICANN community are
>> materially and adversely affected whenever ICANN staff seeks to impose de
>> facto Consensus Policy in a top-down manner that is inconsistent with the
>> Bylaws./
>>
>> Even if we were to agree with the position taken, we have to get there
>> through due process or procedures will mean nothing.
>>
>>
>> Sam
>> On 12/10/2015 8:53 AM, Edward Morris wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>> I've attached a copy of a draft Reconsideration Request I've been working
>>> on with Phil Corwin. There may be some changes in grammar and the like but
>>> substantially this is likely to be what we'd hope to submit. As the
>>> deadline for submission is tomorrow comments / approval is requested.
>>> The base issue at hand is staff imposing new gTLD RPM's on legacy gTLD's
>>> through newel agreements. This is de facto development of consensus policy
>>> through contract by staff rather than through a properly constituted pop.
>>> As we've previously discussed on list this needs to be opposed if the GNSO
>>> hopes to maintain its current role.
>>> We and the BC certainly do not share common positions on the substantive
>>> issue involved here; that is, the BC would be very happy to have the new
>>> RPM's applied to legacy gTLD's while that traditionally has not been our
>>> position. It's been a bit of a challenge to get language acceptable to
>>> both in this regard as Phil head some specific instructions but hopefully
>>> we've done do.
>>> I'll turn this over to our esteemed Chair and PC head honcho to see how /
>>> if we can sign off on this. Again, the submission deadline is tomorrow so
>>> this needs to get done pronto. It's rare to get a CSG member to oppose ip
>>> expansion, even on a procedural basis, so I hope we can take advantage of
>>> this opportunity.
>>> Best,
>>> Ed
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg