Dear all,
Is it true that this has not been picked up by the Policy Committee and
this has not been submitted?
I think that would be a real pity of all the work people have put into
this, and I think it's worth to still process it. If not, I would like
to understand why.
Best,
Niels
On 09/19/2016 03:32 AM, Vidushi Marda wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Here is the final version of the NCSG comment to the gTLD Subsequent
> Procedures WG:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c1IC7-KJz12XuDBFeEYiDMoh8I1ibks_McW0XqHh_nw/edit#.
> All comments have been addressed and resolved. Hoping that the policy
> committee can pick this up now.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Vidushi
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *[log in to unmask]
> *To: *[log in to unmask]
> *Cc: *[log in to unmask]
> *Sent: *Monday, September 19, 2016 11:06:35 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [Deadline for comments 9/9] Re: pre-warning draft comment
> to gTLD subsequent procedure WG
>
> Dear All,
>
> Here is the final version of the NCSG comment to the gTLD Subsequent
> Procedures WG:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c1IC7-KJz12XuDBFeEYiDMoh8I1ibks_McW0XqHh_nw/edit#.
> All comments have been addressed and resolved. Hoping that the policy
> committee can pick this up now.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Vidushi
>
> ----- On Sep 6, 2016, at 12:37 PM, Vidushi Marda <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> I think the idea of deadlines for comments work well. Thanks for the
> suggestion Farzi.
>
> Can we make the last day for comments/feedback on the doc this
> Friday the 9th? That way we should be able to send in the doc by
> next week after incorporating them.
>
> Best,
>
> Vidushi
>
> ----- On Sep 5, 2016, at 7:01 AM, Michael Oghia
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> +1 Farzi
>
> -Michael
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 5:18 PM, farzaneh badii
> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Thank you Vidushi and Niels,
> I think your document will benefit from more referencing to
> the actual policies you are talking about. Also as Tatiana
> pointed out you need to resolve the comments first. I
> suggest set a deadline for people to comment, then resolve
> those comments and then send it out to policy committee.
> This is what we did in the past and worked out well.
>
> Best
>
> Farzaneh
>
> On 4 September 2016 at 14:33, Tatiana Tropina
> <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Hi Niels and all,
> some of the comments in the google doc (e.g. Avri's
> comments) require further work and/or clarification,
> don't think the document can be sent to the PC as it is.
> Thanks!
> Tatiana
>
> On 4 September 2016 at 14:30, Niels ten Oever
> <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> This document has now been reviewed and commented on
> by several people,
> perhaps the policy committee can pick this up?
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
>
> On 08/30/2016 07:43 PM, Vidushi Marda wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Please find the first draft comment to the gTLD
> Subsequent Procedure WG at this link:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c1IC7-KJz12XuDBFeEYiDMoh8I1ibks_McW0XqHh_nw/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> > While the request was extremely detailed with six
> subjects and specific questions under each, due to
> paucity of time, this draft only discusses over
> arching human rights concerns.
> >
> > I look forward to your feedback and comments.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Vidushi
> >
> > ----- On Aug 26, 2016, at 7:57 PM, Kathy Kleiman
> [log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Niels,
> >>
> >> I think this idea is a very good one. I have been
> worried that we did
> >> not submit a comment to the New gTLD Subsequent
> Procedures Working
> >> Group, especially on Community Groups. A few
> weeks ago, Avri was kind
> >> enough to answer my questions about this, and
> encourage our NCSG
> >> participation. I think it is the perfect time to
> submit a comment --
> >> even a little late!
> >>
> >> But quick note, at least in the US, next week is
> big end of summer
> >> vacation week and traditionally very quiet.
> Perhaps allowing a week for
> >> comment would enable more people to participate.
> >>
> >> Best and tx to you, Vidushi and the CCWP HR,
> >>
> >> Kathy
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8/26/2016 7:50 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> >>> I hope this e-mail finds you all well. We just
> had a very productive
> >>> call of the CCWP HR in which we discussed
> several issues in which the
> >>> gTLD Subsequenty Procedures WG impacts human
> rights (community priority
> >>> procedure, how 'community' is defined, lack of
> gTLD applications from
> >>> the global south, etc).
> >>>
> >>> I am aware that the first official input/comment
> period of this WG is
> >>> over, but I think if we would send something in
> it might still be
> >>> considered, especially since the NCSG did not
> send comment yet.
> >>>
> >>> Vidushi has graciously offered to do the
> drafting, also based on the
> >>> report she initially drafted and which was
> accepted as CCWP HR document [0].
> >>>
> >>> So this is an early warning that you'll receive
> a draft comment on
> >>> Tuesday, if we want to it to be considered I
> think we would need to
> >>> submit it rather switfly, that's why I am
> sending this pre-warning so
> >>> you know you can excpect it. Stay tuned :)
> >>>
> >>> All the best,
> >>>
> >>> Niels
> >>>
> >>> [0]
> >>>
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/53772653/4.CCWP-HR%20Jurisdiction.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1467180138000&api=v2
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
> --
> Niels ten Oever
> Head of Digital
>
> Article 19
> www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>
> PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
> 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Farzaneh
>
>
>
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
|
