Hi Roelof,

Thanks for this excellent letter.

My only suggestion would be to add some concrete asks.

My concern is that otherwise we will again receive a reply along the lines of the memorable:

“I have initiated internally a process to analyze the public comments/responses process for the budget to:

• lay out and diagnose the issues/shortcomings (including seeking additional feedback from other community organizations)
• Draft a target approach / Share and obtain feedback
• Implement the target approach.”

Therefore I would ask for:

1. Proper responses to our questions from the previous letter by November 8^th (Which gives us a week to digest and discuss on November 17)

2. An overview of actions to remedy the problems to be presented at the ccNSO meeting.

3. A revised timeline for the SOP cycle to be presented at the ccNSO meeting (Which must be impacted by the delay in the Strat Planning consultation)

4. A commitment from the board to get this solved. (Not just an acknowledgement that they are aware of the issues.)

Regards,

Peter

From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Roelof Meijer
Sent: woensdag 16 oktober 2013 17:37
To: 'ccnso-sopcommittee@icann.org'
Cc: 'ccnso-council@icann.org'
Subject: [ccnso-council] Draft Letter SOP WG -Crocker&Chehade oct2013

Dear Collegues,

As a follow-up on our previous exchange and my correspondence to Xavier Calvez, please receive herewith the draft of the letter I would like tos end to Steve Crocker and Fadi Chehade re the lack of any reasonable responses and or actions to improve based on the comments the SOP has submitted over the years.

Please let me know if you have any comments or suggestions to change, if at all possible before the end of Friday

Best regards,

Roelof Meijer