Thanks, Steve. As Chair, I want to note that although numerous discussions took place on the BC lists, since some members raised concerns, and others expressed support, the ExComm , after discussion, supported a new and focused opportunity of 14 days for members to discuss, debate, and identify support and non support for additions to the list of Improvements to the new gTLD program. But time is limited to be prepared for discussions w GAC and ICANN for Costa Rica. This discussion is a priority. The BC letter to the Board made it clear that the BC supports ICANN, did not ask for a delay, but noted the need for focused improvements, which can occur before names go live into the "Root". Improvements may include additional suggestions from members. If so, please add those to the list. For instance, a member recently asked me if the BC can weigh in again about mechanisms within the Guidebook that specifically affect a brand holder as a registry. I want to thank our Vice Chair of Policy Coordination,other members of the Excomm, members who expressed views of any kind, and urge members to use the mechanism provided, via this process -- e.g. If you have changes, or comments, please use the format that this process provides. Those will be aggregated and analyzed, and summarized for BC members, following the timeline Steve has laid out. Marilyn Cade Chair Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 02:55:18 To: <bc-gnso@icann.org> Subject: [bc-gnso] RE-SEND: For discussion and review: proposed BC list of implementation improvements for new gTLD program (Sorry, I sent the previous note before it was complete) -- BC members, We've discussed this list of implementation improvements for several weeks.   And we want BC members to have a full 14 days to review and approve the final list before we deliver to ICANN Board and management ahead of the Costa Rica meeting. So please review the attached list, which includes two sections: Section 1:  Existing BC positions that are re-stated as implementation changes.   For these items, please indicate any comments or suggestions regarding continued BC advocacy. Section 2:  Recommendations that are not directly take from established BC positions. Please indicate whether you Support or Oppose these implementation changes.  You may also offer any relevant comments.  If, by 16-Feb-2012, more than 10% of paid BC members indicate they do not support any of the Section 2 items, we will conduct voting on those items.  That voting would be managed by the newly-elected BC officers --  after they take office on 17-Feb-2012. Thanks for reviewing these items.  I'm available if you have questions about substance or process. -- Steve DelBianco BC vice chair for policy coordination +1.202.420.7482