For your review: public comment summary and review tool
Dear all, Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in blue in the response column (far right). The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff¹s approach in thorough and detailed review. We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday¹s meeting. We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week¹s high-intensity meetings. While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the ³bigger picture². Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document. Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations). As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the ³download all² button at the bottom left side of the macro. Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace
Grace, Thanks, this is a good start and a helpful document. Nice and simple. I would hope some quick improvements or emendations could be made before we start using it as a basis for discussion, however. Slide 7 needs to separate the 32% "against" PTI into commenters who do not want IFO separated at all and those who want it more separated. They shouldn't be bundled together because they are pointing in opposite directions. Given the results shown on Slide 9 (insider vs. outsider board) it might make more sense to bundle those who want more separation into the "For" PTI category. Better yet, have 3 categories. And it would be good to see a breakdown of who you classified as "for" and "against-no separation" and "against-more separation" to verify these numbers. I counted only 2 or 3 who did not want it separated at all. I think we might have a green slide here. On Slide 15, I am not sure it makes sense to classify comments about a lack of detail into "for" and "against." A comment that said there was not enough info about separation mechanisms is not necessarily "against" the proposed separation mechanism. I read all the comments and don't think I read a single one that was "against" a separation mechanism, most just recognized that this part of the CWG proposal was very sketchy. Which it was! So you could have another green slide here too if you reframed the question as: "does the separation mechanism need more work?" Slide 14 highlights relevant input but seems a bit out of place at this stage, given the role of the ICG. While comments talking about the relationship between the 3 operational communities made some valid points, the primary task of CWG-stewardship is to define a solution for the names community. The other communities can then address its relationship to that solution and the ICG is then tasked with brokering compatibility adjustments. --MM From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Cc: Brenda Brewer Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Dear all, Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in blue in the response column (far right). The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff's approach in thorough and detailed review. We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday's meeting. We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week's high-intensity meetings. While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the "bigger picture". Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document. Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations). As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the "download all" button at the bottom left side of the macro. Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace
Thanks a lot to everyone on the staff team for doing this so quickly. On slide 4 of the presentation showing the major trends, what does the following statement mean: "Those categories representing more than 10% of responses are presented in this document."? Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Cc: Brenda Brewer Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Dear all, Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in blue in the response column (far right). The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff's approach in thorough and detailed review. We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday's meeting. We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week's high-intensity meetings. While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the "bigger picture". Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document. Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations). As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the "download all" button at the bottom left side of the macro. Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace
Chuck, Exactly what it says, if for a given category 10% or more of respondents stated an opinion for or against it was included. Does this help? B. On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
Thanks a lot to everyone on the staff team for doing this so quickly.
On slide 4 of the presentation showing the major trends, what does the following statement mean: “Those categories representing more than 10% of responses are presented in this document.”?
Chuck
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Grace Abuhamad *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Cc:* Brenda Brewer *Subject:* [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool
Dear all,
Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in *blue* in the response column (far right).
The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff’s approach in thorough and detailed review. *We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday’s meeting. *We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week’s high-intensity meetings.
While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the “bigger picture”. Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document.
Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations).
As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the “download all” button at the bottom left side of the macro.
Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend,
Grace
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
That does help Bernie. In other words, if an opinion wasn’t supported by at least 10% of the commenters, i.e., at least 4 commenters, it was included in the numbers for the trend presentation. Chuck From: Bernard Turcotte [mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 3:41 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Grace Abuhamad; cwg-stewardship@icann.org; Brenda Brewer Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Chuck, Exactly what it says, if for a given category 10% or more of respondents stated an opinion for or against it was included. Does this help? B. On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote: Thanks a lot to everyone on the staff team for doing this so quickly. On slide 4 of the presentation showing the major trends, what does the following statement mean: “Those categories representing more than 10% of responses are presented in this document.”? Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Cc: Brenda Brewer Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Dear all, Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in blue in the response column (far right). The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff’s approach in thorough and detailed review. We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday’s meeting. We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week’s high-intensity meetings. While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the “bigger picture”. Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document. Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations). As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the “download all” button at the bottom left side of the macro. Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Correct. B. On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
That does help Bernie. In other words, if an opinion wasn’t supported by at least 10% of the commenters, i.e., at least 4 commenters, it was included in the numbers for the trend presentation.
Chuck
*From:* Bernard Turcotte [mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 3:41 PM *To:* Gomes, Chuck *Cc:* Grace Abuhamad; cwg-stewardship@icann.org; Brenda Brewer *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool
Chuck,
Exactly what it says, if for a given category 10% or more of respondents stated an opinion for or against it was included.
Does this help?
B.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
Thanks a lot to everyone on the staff team for doing this so quickly.
On slide 4 of the presentation showing the major trends, what does the following statement mean: “Those categories representing more than 10% of responses are presented in this document.”?
Chuck
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Grace Abuhamad *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Cc:* Brenda Brewer *Subject:* [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool
Dear all,
Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in *blue* in the response column (far right).
The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff’s approach in thorough and detailed review. *We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday’s meeting. *We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week’s high-intensity meetings.
While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the “bigger picture”. Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document.
Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations).
As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the “download all” button at the bottom left side of the macro.
Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend,
Grace
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Thanks for the explanation, Bernie. I do have a caveat about the method of calculation for the presentation slides: they appear to take each response on a par level, thus a comment from an Organisation or Government or an ICANN SO/AC appears to have the same weight as a response from an individual. Granted, the majority of comments were filed on behalf of organisations but I would be careful about reading too much into the percentages that were calculated - and am therefore concerned about having a cut-off at 10%. We are going to need to read through the whole set of comments to have a better feeling of the response from the community. Kindest regards, Olivier On 22/05/2015 21:41, Bernard Turcotte wrote:
Chuck,
Exactly what it says, if for a given category 10% or more of respondents stated an opinion for or against it was included.
Does this help?
B.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com <mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote:
Thanks a lot to everyone on the staff team for doing this so quickly.
On slide 4 of the presentation showing the major trends, what does the following statement mean: “Those categories representing more than 10% of responses are presented in this document.”?
Chuck
*From:*cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Grace Abuhamad *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> *Cc:* Brenda Brewer *Subject:* [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool
Dear all,
Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in */blue/* in the response column (far right).
The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff’s approach in thorough and detailed review. *We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday’s meeting. *We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week’s high-intensity meetings.
While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the “bigger picture”. Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document.
Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations).
As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the “download all” button at the bottom left side of the macro.
Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend,
Grace
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
+1 Von: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Gesendet: Montag, 25. Mai 2015 20:46 An: Bernard Turcotte; Gomes, Chuck Cc: Brenda Brewer; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Betreff: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Thanks for the explanation, Bernie. I do have a caveat about the method of calculation for the presentation slides: they appear to take each response on a par level, thus a comment from an Organisation or Government or an ICANN SO/AC appears to have the same weight as a response from an individual. Granted, the majority of comments were filed on behalf of organisations but I would be careful about reading too much into the percentages that were calculated - and am therefore concerned about having a cut-off at 10%. We are going to need to read through the whole set of comments to have a better feeling of the response from the community. Kindest regards, Olivier On 22/05/2015 21:41, Bernard Turcotte wrote: Chuck, Exactly what it says, if for a given category 10% or more of respondents stated an opinion for or against it was included. Does this help? B. On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote: Thanks a lot to everyone on the staff team for doing this so quickly. On slide 4 of the presentation showing the major trends, what does the following statement mean: "Those categories representing more than 10% of responses are presented in this document."? Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Cc: Brenda Brewer Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Dear all, Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in blue in the response column (far right). The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff's approach in thorough and detailed review. We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday's meeting. We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week's high-intensity meetings. While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the "bigger picture". Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document. Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations). As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the "download all" button at the bottom left side of the macro. Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
+1. Although I did not check all the comments one by one, but I assume that in most cases each comment just represents ONE organization/individual. Please note that there is a Joint Comment by five Chinese organizations (stakeholders). I don't know whether they have been counted five times. Jian From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Date: 2015-05-26 02:46 To: Bernard Turcotte; Gomes, Chuck CC: Brenda Brewer; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Thanks for the explanation, Bernie. I do have a caveat about the method of calculation for the presentation slides: they appear to take each response on a par level, thus a comment from an Organisation or Government or an ICANN SO/AC appears to have the same weight as a response from an individual. Granted, the majority of comments were filed on behalf of organisations but I would be careful about reading too much into the percentages that were calculated - and am therefore concerned about having a cut-off at 10%. We are going to need to read through the whole set of comments to have a better feeling of the response from the community. Kindest regards, Olivier On 22/05/2015 21:41, Bernard Turcotte wrote: Chuck, Exactly what it says, if for a given category 10% or more of respondents stated an opinion for or against it was included. Does this help? B. On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote: Thanks a lot to everyone on the staff team for doing this so quickly. On slide 4 of the presentation showing the major trends, what does the following statement mean: “Those categories representing more than 10% of responses are presented in this document.”? Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Cc: Brenda Brewer Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Dear all, Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in blue in the response column (far right). The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff’s approach in thorough and detailed review. We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday’s meeting. We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week’s high-intensity meetings. While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the “bigger picture”. Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document. Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations). As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the “download all” button at the bottom left side of the macro. Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Wow! this is huge effort....thanks for making the report available in this format. Regards On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in *blue* in the response column (far right).
The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff’s approach in thorough and detailed review. *We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday’s meeting. *We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week’s high-intensity meetings.
While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the “bigger picture”. Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document.
Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations).
As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the “download all” button at the bottom left side of the macro.
Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* The key to understanding is humility - my view !
I want to once again thank staff for the extensive and excellent work they did to review comments, insert them into the review tool and draft CWG responses. In the attached file I inserted 60 comments regarding the proposed CWG responses. Please note that they are my personal comments because there was not time to get feedback from my Verisign colleagues or from my RySG colleagues. I am not sure what the process will be in terms of finalizing the review tool document but I hope that my comments will be constructive whatever the process is. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:34 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Cc: Brenda Brewer Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review: public comment summary and review tool Dear all, Staff has compiled a summary overview of the pubic comment submissions and filled out a public comment review tool, noting responses and specific action items for the CWG-Stewardship to consider. Please review these documents and suggest edits based on your assessment of the public comment submissions. The proposed actions for the CWG-Stewardship are highlighted in blue in the response column (far right). The Public Comment Review Tool is very long and may be difficult to read. This is due to staff's approach in thorough and detailed review. We will provide a more digestible, action-focused, version of this tool for Tuesday's meeting. We are providing the long version to you today to demonstrate our work progress and preparation for next week's high-intensity meetings. While the Public Comment Review Tool is very detailed, the summary overview is presented in a presentation format and focuses more on the "bigger picture". Depending on your review-style, you may be inclined to start with one or the other document. Also, please note that these documents incorporate all (44) submissions received up until the deadline on 20 May at 23:59 UTC. As of 22 May at 16:00 UTC, there are (7) late submissions. These submissions have not yet been incorporated in this document but will be added in time for the high-intensity meetings (along with the submissions received based on the extension for those who are reliant on translations). As a reminder, Brenda kindly pulled all the submissions together on the Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/o5A0Aw. You can download all the files at once (like a zip file) by clicking on the "download all" button at the bottom left side of the macro. Have a good (submission-reading-filled) weekend, Grace
participants (8)
-
Bernard Turcotte -
Gomes, Chuck -
Grace Abuhamad -
jczhang＠knet.cn -
Jorge.Cancio＠bakom.admin.ch -
Milton L Mueller -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond -
Seun Ojedeji