Thanks Sent from my iPhone On 14 Oct 2015, at 4:18 PM, Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de<mailto:rickert@anwaelte.de>> wrote: Thanks, Bruce! For the areas that need to be refined: These are areas where the group has already seen proposals, which just need some tweaking. For the areas that need to be considered: These would be parts where the group has not seen draft language at all, e.g. on human rights. Best, Thomas Am 14.10.2015 um 04:18 schrieb Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au<mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>>: Thanks Thomas, very helpful. Is it possible to get a definition of the meaning of the status “to be considered” and “to be refined”. I am guessing that a rough match to the Board’s terminology is that a “to be considered’ is a 1B and “to be refined” is a 1A – but just want to check. Thanks, Bruce Tonkin From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Rickert Sent: Tuesday, 13 October 2015 10:48 PM To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Scorecard for Dublin All, Mathieu has kindly updated a Google doc he had prepared some time ago. It is a scorecard displaying the various areas of work and their respective completion status. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HcUUDn5DHSVo7lLo-FWU_QMa8PGgfZWTP_kG... There's a lot of yellow "to be refined" which we should be able to turn into green in Dublin. Kind regards, Thomas _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community