Dear Sam & John,

Actually, ICANN did lead us to believe that it would provide its view of the issue in writing.  We discussed at length the need for each side to better understand each other's view of the issue and how providing written submissions to each other and the community would do that.  It is disappointing that you have a different memory of the conversation and too bad that ICANN Legal Dept. refused our request to record these conversations, so we could clarify the disagreement.  Obviously it does not make sense for only one side of the issue to take the time to explain itself to each other and the community.  We must again request that any further conversations be recorded and made available to the community.  ICANN Legal Dept.'s different recollection of commitments made during our last call provides all the reason necessary to show why such discussions must be recorded.  And we reiterate our request that ICANN explain itself in writing (or verbally and make a transcript), but simply not responding to this important issue of the staff's role to implement GNSO Policy is not acceptable.  Is it really ICANN Legal Dept.'s position that it does not need to explain its interpretation of Sections 9-10 of ICANN's Bylaws Annex A that allows it to over-rule the GNSO policy?  This seems like an issue for the ATRT and the Ombudsman to look at.

Of course I'm in BA at the meeting all week and would appreciate a conversation with John Jeffrey to discuss our concerns and next steps at his earliest opportunity.  So please let me know what time works on John's end so we can move this process along.

Thank you,
Robin




On Nov 13, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Samantha Eisner wrote:

> Dear Robin -
> 
> Thank you for the submission of the written position of the NCSG on this
> issue.  With that in place, as indicated on our phone call, we can now
> proceed with the scheduling of further CEP discussions as well as the
> timing for the filing of the IRP.  To clarify, ICANN did not commit to
> providing a written response to the item submitted by the NCSG, though we
> can discuss that during our next CEP session.
> 
> John and Amy will be in Buenos Aires and can be available for a meeting.
> Please coordinate timing directly with them, as I will not be on the
> ground there.
> 
> During our call, we had also discussed the potential for posting the
> NCSG's written position.  We can discuss further, but we do plan on making
> this posting to the IRP document page at http://www.icann.org/en/news/irp.
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Sam
> -- 
> Samantha Eisner
> Senior Counsel, ICANN
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
> Los Angeles, California  90094
> Direct Dial: +1 310 578 8631
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/7/13 5:59 PM, "Robin Gross" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Sam,
>> 
>> Thanks, however, my understanding from our last call was that you were
>> going to send us an email to propose a schedule for providing more
>> written details from both sides.  No worries, however, as we've attached
>> our position on the issue to this email so you can better understand our
>> argument going forward.
>> 
>> By when can we expect to see a written response from ICANN explaining its
>> view of the issue and its interpretation of the bylaws sections in
>> question?
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Robin
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 30, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Samantha Eisner wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Robin - 
>>> 
>>> As I recall from our conversation on 18 October, we are waiting for you
>>> get us something in writing setting out your position as stated during
>>> the
>>> CEP call, and that you would not be able to provide that until after
>>> your
>>> return from the IGF, possibly by the end of last week.  Will you be able
>>> to get us something this week?  Having that will assist us in
>>> identifying
>>> further scheduling for the CEP as well as a reasonable time period for
>>> an
>>> extension of the filing for an IRP.
>>> 
>>> Thanks, 
>>> 
>>> Sam	
>>> -- 
>>> Samantha Eisner
>>> Senior Counsel, ICANN
>>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>>> Los Angeles, California  90094
>>> Direct Dial: +1 310 578 8631
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/28/13 12:56 PM, "Robin Gross" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hello Sam,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm back from IGF now and hadn't heard anything further from you while
>>>> I
>>>> was there about scheduling the next steps for the CEP and subsequent
>>>> IRP.
>>>> So I just wanted to check back in with you about scheduling the next
>>>> steps.  Please let me know what you suggest when you have a moment.
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> Robin
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>