Thanks

Sent from my iPhone

On 14 Oct 2015, at 4:18 PM, Thomas Rickert <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>:

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] On Behalf Of Thomas Rickert
Sent: Tuesday, 13 October 2015 10:48 PM
To: Accountability Cross Community <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_kGo1EXNQs/edit?usp=sharing

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
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