[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] Updated Motion on the CCWG-IG

[Rafik Dammak]

hi all,

the motion was approved :) work starts for the CCWG-IG

Rafik

 2017-08-24 22:31 GMT+09:00 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>:

> Observer - I agree. Thanks Rafik for getting this done. It was time
> consuming and hard to fight for.
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 8:42 AM Matthew Shears <matthew at intpolicy.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This looks good - thanks Rafik.
>>
>> On 24/08/2017 00:50, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> here the response from Keith. I discussed with him regarding the
>> amendments and I am ok with the changes. the new version is an acceptable
>> one.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Drazek, Keith via council <council at gnso.icann.org>
>> Date: 2017-08-23 17:18 GMT+09:00
>> Subject: [council] Updated Motion on the CCWG-IG
>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> To prepare for our vote on the CCWG-IG motion this Thursday, here’s where
>> we stand.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’d like to thank both Rafik and Wolf-Ulrich for their input last week.
>> Rafik and I exchanged emails again this week and I believe we are in sync.
>>
>>
>>
>> As the maker of the motion:
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. I accept the proposed change of the withdrawal deadline from ICANN
>>    60 to ICANN 61.
>>    2. I agree that we need some additional clarity about the expected
>>    timeline leading up to ICANN 61, so the transition can be as seamless as
>>    possible. I suggest we target a GNSO Council meeting mid-way between ICANN
>>    60 and ICANN 61 as the opportunity for the GNSO Council to review the
>>    proposed replacement structure. I’m also support acknowledging further that
>>    the GNSO Council expects a replacement to be created by ICANN 61.
>>    3. With the extension, ICANN 61 needs to be the clear date for
>>    withdrawal. If we leave wiggle room in the motion, then the work of finding
>>    a replacement will not have the urgency or attention it requires. We are
>>    extending the date to allow for the necessary work, but I think that new
>>    date needs to be firm. We have all seen how, at ICANN, “work fills the time
>>    and space provided.” We need to avoid further slippage and set clear
>>    expectations for ourselves and for the other Chartering Organizations.
>>
>>
>>
>> As such, I’ve attached updated motion language that I believe addresses
>> the points raised to date.
>>
>>
>>
>> James, as the seconder of the motion, do you concur or have any concerns?
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Keith
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> council mailing list
>> council at gnso.icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> Virus-free.
>> www.avg.com
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>> <#m_-7052838523074276160_m_-2938874596675133609_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Matthew Shearsmatthew at intpolicy.com+447712472987 <+44%207712%20472987>Skype:mshears
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
> --
> Farzaneh
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170824/5c5f0118/attachment.htm>