Hi, On the call now, and as a preview to the section it was mentioned that the definition are preliminary and will be looked at at again the end of the process. But i will bring up the points. Thanks for the comments. avri On 18-Jan-14 12:33, Nicolas Adam wrote: > Indeed, if the characterization of "the nature, scope and effect of such > guidance" will be a substantive part of the WG's debated output, then > it's just better at this stage not to propose any possible > boundary-setting process extensions. > > Nicolas > > On 2014-01-17 7:51 PM, Olivier Kouami wrote: >> +1 @Amr; I am following you. I like your opinion on this matter. >> Thank you also for the link. >> Cheers ! >> -Olevie- >> >> >> >> 2014/1/17 Amr Elsadr <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> >> BTW…, here is a link to the WG charter for reference: >> https://community.icann.org/display/PIWG/3.+WG+Charter >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr >> >> On Jan 17, 2014, at 2:43 PM, Amr Elsadr <[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >> >> > Hi Avri, >> > >> > I think these definitions are all fine except for the one for >> “GNSO Policy Guidance”. The proposal to develop these definitions >> was made by the work-plan sub-team of the Policy and >> Implementation WG as a first step in answering the charter >> questions. This proposal was a very reasonable one (IMHO) as the >> intent of the definitions was solely for use by the WG members in >> order to make sure that everyone on the WG understood what the >> terms referred to while using them to develop recommendations. The >> definitions, as they stand now, are working definitions and not >> meant to be an output of the WG. >> > >> > However, the way I see it, the definition of “GNSO Policy >> Guidance” is a bit preemptive in some of its assumptions. The >> context in which policy guidance would be produced is still >> something to be determined by the WG, but already given what I >> feel is an inappropriate framing. I would have preferred something >> more closely in sync with the charter question like: >> > >> > A process for developing gTLD policy other than “Consensus >> Policy” instead of a GNSO Policy Development Process. The process >> by which policy is developed using “GNSO Policy Guidance” as well >> as the criteria determining when it would be appropriate to do so >> will be deliberated by the Policy and Implementation Working >> Group, and included as part of the Working Group’s recommendations >> in its final report to the GNSO Council. >> > >> > This will all still be discussed by the WG of course, but I see >> no need to include the circumstances in which policy guidance >> would be resorted to at this stage. WG members might very well >> work based on these assumptions in the future, when they should >> really make these determinations themselves. >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Amr >> > >> > On Jan 17, 2014, at 7:45 AM, Avri Doria <[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> Proposed definitions in the Policy and Implementation WG. >> >> >> >> Viewpoints? >> >> >> >> avri >> >> >> >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> >> Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] For your review - proposed >> working >> >> definitions >> >> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:41:20 -0800 >> >> From: Marika Konings <[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> >> To: [log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dear All, >> >> >> >> On behalf of the working definitions sub-team, please find >> attached the >> >> proposed P&I working definitions for your review and consideration. >> >> Please feel free to share any feedback you may have with the >> mailing >> >> list in advance of next week's WG meeting. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Marika >> >> >> >> >> >> <Draft definitions - FINAL - 16 January 2013.doc> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Olévié (Olivier) A. A. KOUAMI >> Membre de ISoc (www.isog.org <http://www.isog.org>) & du FOSSFA >> (www.fossfa.net <http://www.fossfa.net>) >> DG Ets GIDA-OKTETS & CEO de INTIC4DEV (http://www.intic4dev.org) >> PC Vice Chair for Francophone Africa ICANN-NCSG/NPOC >> (http://www.npoc.org/) >> SG de ESTETIC (http://www.estetic.tg) >> Po Box : 851 - Tél.: (228) 90 98 86 50 / (228) 928 512 41 / (228) 224 >> 999 25 >> Skype : olevie1 Facebook : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé – >> Togo >> >