[NCSG-PC] pragraph when re-submitting short and long term reviews

[Ayden Férdeline]

Thanks, Farzi. Please find below in red some suggested edits:

The Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group is we are re-submitting our comments dated 31 July 2018 pertainingon to the future of short-term[1] and long-term[2] specific and organizational reviews. We were aredisappointed surprisedthat the Bboard in its 10 August 2018 Organizational Effectiveness Committee meeting[3] formed the view [(in OEC meeting)](https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/minutes-oec-2018-08-10-en) decided that there was insufficient not enoughconsensus to move forward.on short and long term reviews due to limited comments[ (a total of 9 but from two ACs (ALAC and SSAC)](https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/report-comments-reviews-long-term-timeline-16aug18-en.pdf) and Supporting organizations (GNSO and CCNSO) and most of  GNSO stakeholder groups and constituencies). The Board's decision to gather further community input through an additional comment window is disappointing, because ask for more comments despite the fact that clearly there was consensus among the submitted comments, and reopening this topic puts a great strain on a community of volunteers with limited time and resources.  In parallel with the effectiveness of Policy Development Processes, the Board should also consider how many issues it re-opens and instructs the community to work on. In future when reopening an issue for further input, wWe alsoask thatethe Board toclearly state its method of gauging consensus in when evaluating public comments submissions and outline why it believes additional input is required. Thank you. Otherwise, it can arbitrarily re-open issues.

[1] https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-specific-reviews-short-term-timeline-14may18/2018q3/000009.html

[2] https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reviews-long-term-timeline-14may18/2018q3/000007.html

[3] https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/minutes-oec-2018-08-10-en

Best wishes,

Ayden

> On 3 Oct 2018, at 19:48, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I wrote this paragraph to be added as an introduction to the resubmission of our comments. Please see below. Also I suggest Rafik share it with the mailing list after receiving your comments tomorrow. we have to submit on Friday.
>
> we are re-submitting our comments on the short term and long term review. We are surprised that the board [(in OEC meeting)](https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/minutes-oec-2018-08-10-en) decided that there was not enough consensus on short and long term reviews due to limited comments[ (a total of 9 but from two ACs (ALAC and SSAC)](https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/report-comments-reviews-long-term-timeline-16aug18-en.pdf) and Supporting organizations (GNSO and CCNSO) and most of  GNSO stakeholder groups and constituencies). The Board's decision to ask for more comments despite the fact that clearly there was consensus among the submitted comments puts a great strain on a community of volunteers with limited time.  In parallel with the effectiveness of Policy Development Processes, the Board should also consider how many issues it re-opens and instructs the community to work on. We also ask the Board to clearly state its method of gauging consensus when evaluating public comments. Otherwise, it can arbitrarily re-open issues.
>
> Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20181003/6212bc4a/attachment.htm>