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