[NCSG-PC] Public Comment on Long Term options to adjust for Reviews timeline

[Kathy Kleiman]

Hi All, Agree with Ayden that there is text missing from this comment -- 
and it means that I (others?) don't (won't) understand what we are 
recommending.

The following recommendation of ICANN.org, I think, makes sense: 
"Staggering the reviews to have no more than one Specific Review and two 
Organizational Reviews running concurrently."  Given two PDP Working 
Groups, one EPDP, and much more taking place in ICANN and the GNSO, I 
think this staggering makes sense and will help us in finding good 
people to join these reviews.

Best, Kathy


On 7/10/2018 5:18 AM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> I think there is some text missing from this comment, but maybe it is 
> my device (I am on a train and trying to view and edit Google Docs 
> over its shaky, intermittent wifi is painful). I will try again later...
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On 9 July 2018 6:23 AM, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here is another comment on long term options to adjust reviews timeline
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VItIeJMKjQMinu_IvJ1uJOvXSfTc_4U5ay_k7F6beOQ/edit
>>
>> We need to share with the mailing list soon. Deadline is 31 July.
>>
>> Best
>>
>>
>> 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/20180710/5ab8574a/attachment.htm>