I also think a professional editor may be helpful. At the same time, a writer who does not have a background of happenings may not help much. If there are professional writers within ICANN staff or within the CCWG then that could help better. I for one would like to emphasis the importance of making sure the effective summary communicates to folks who have not been following the process. Diagrams that explain processes/mechanisms will be really helpful. Finally, executive summary should indeed be a summary and should avoid too much details. Regards Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 Kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 11 Nov 2015 08:08, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
I think it needs a thorough edit from professional editors. After all, even Hemingway wasn't Hemingway without Maxwell Perkins (apologies for culturally-specific and slightly archaic reference).
Other than that, I agree with Sidley's comments in their email and to the extent I've tried to review them, their comments.
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Gregory, Holly <holly.gregory@sidley.com> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs and CCWG,
Attached please find Sidley’s comments on the draft Executive Summary. Given the very short window for review we have not had time to coordinate our comments with the Adler firm and apologize for that. Adler will be sending their comments separately. Please note also that given the very short time frame we have not been able to go back and check against the transcripts of the various meetings and therefore are relying on memory for our understanding of where the CCWG has formed consensus (or near consensus) on various issues.
Overall we find the Executive Summary overly long with significant redundancies. We think it would benefit from a thorough edit by your professional writers. We also believe that the summary is inaccurate in its description of the community processes with respect to the decisions to: (1) remove individual directors and (2) approve Fundamental Bylaws. (We agree with Jordan’s comments on the Fundamental Bylaws.) We also recommend that a more pointed discussion of the CWG dependencies be added so that the reader can understand the broader context in which the Proposal has been developed. We have also edited errors in the description of the legal framework that applies. We have noted these comments in the draft.
Please let us know if you would like to discuss or if we can be of further assistance with this draft.
Kind regards,
Holly
*HOLLY* *J. GREGORY* Partner and Co-Chair Corporate Governance & Executive Compensation Practice Group
*Sidley Austin LLP* 787 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019 +1 212 839 5853 holly.gregory@sidley.com www.sidley.com
[image: http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png] <http://www.sidley.com/> *SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP*
**************************************************************************************************** This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us immediately.
****************************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community