Dear All, We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call. Best regards, Martin and Lise
I made a couple edits and suggested a third in my next to last comment. I also identified in my comments some possible action items that the CWG may need to perform as soon as possible assuming that the principles are adopted by the CWG. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 8:34 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles Dear All, We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call. Best regards, Martin and Lise
I made a couple more edits in item g at the end of the document. Chuck From: Gomes, Chuck Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 4:12 PM To: 'Lise Fuhr'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I made a couple edits and suggested a third in my next to last comment. I also identified in my comments some possible action items that the CWG may need to perform as soon as possible assuming that the principles are adopted by the CWG. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]<mailto:[mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]> On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 8:34 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles Dear All, We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call. Best regards, Martin and Lise
I dissent from principle g by the way. I could see why oversight of IANA might be multi-stakeholder, but management need not be. -MM From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Sunday, December 7, 2014 4:18 PM To: Lise Fuhr; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I made a couple more edits in item g at the end of the document. Chuck From: Gomes, Chuck Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 4:12 PM To: 'Lise Fuhr'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I made a couple edits and suggested a third in my next to last comment. I also identified in my comments some possible action items that the CWG may need to perform as soon as possible assuming that the principles are adopted by the CWG. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]<mailto:[mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]> On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 8:34 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles Dear All, We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call. Best regards, Martin and Lise
Milton, It is ineffective to literally manage in a multistakeholder way but it is possible to respect and follow multistakeholder developed policies in managing. Chuck From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 5:55 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; Lise Fuhr; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I dissent from principle g by the way. I could see why oversight of IANA might be multi-stakeholder, but management need not be. -MM From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]<mailto:[mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]> On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Sunday, December 7, 2014 4:18 PM To: Lise Fuhr; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I made a couple more edits in item g at the end of the document. Chuck From: Gomes, Chuck Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 4:12 PM To: 'Lise Fuhr'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I made a couple edits and suggested a third in my next to last comment. I also identified in my comments some possible action items that the CWG may need to perform as soon as possible assuming that the principles are adopted by the CWG. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]<mailto:[mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]> On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 8:34 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles Dear All, We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call. Best regards, Martin and Lise
I agree to Chuck’s edits: - f.vi. should be deleted. I can’t recognize a difference in value compared to the chapeau text. - h.: My concern is with the last sentence “separability should persist...”) since it claims for an eternal fixing which I never would dare to implement. It should be deleted in my opinion. - g. (Multistakehoder principle): numbering should be “i.”. I also concur with Milton. Isn’t here “governance” more appropriate than “management”? Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Gomes, Chuck Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 10:18 PM To: Lise Fuhr ; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I made a couple more edits in item g at the end of the document. Chuck From: Gomes, Chuck Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 4:12 PM To: 'Lise Fuhr'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles I made a couple edits and suggested a third in my next to last comment. I also identified in my comments some possible action items that the CWG may need to perform as soon as possible assuming that the principles are adopted by the CWG. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 8:34 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles Dear All, We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call. Best regards, Martin and Lise -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
I agree with Wolf-Ulrich on the "separability should persist." The perpetual nature of this bothered me as well. (I agree on the other two points, too, but I dealt with them in my revised draft, I believe.) Greg *Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab* *666 Third Avenue **ï** New York, NY 10017-5621* *Direct* 212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022 *Fax* 212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428 *gsshatan@lawabel.com <gsshatan@lawabel.com>* *ICANN-related: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> * *www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>* On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 2:14 AM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
I agree to Chuck’s edits:
- f.vi. should be deleted. I can’t recognize a difference in value compared to the chapeau text.
- h.: My concern is with the last sentence “separability should persist...”) since it claims for an eternal fixing which I never would dare to implement. It should be deleted in my opinion.
- g. (Multistakehoder principle): numbering should be “i.”. I also concur with Milton. Isn’t here “governance” more appropriate than “management”?
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
*From:* Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> *Sent:* Sunday, December 07, 2014 10:18 PM *To:* Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr@difo.dk> ; cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles
I made a couple more edits in item g at the end of the document.
Chuck
*From:* Gomes, Chuck *Sent:* Sunday, December 07, 2014 4:12 PM *To:* 'Lise Fuhr'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles
I made a couple edits and suggested a third in my next to last comment. I also identified in my comments some possible action items that the CWG may need to perform as soon as possible assuming that the principles are adopted by the CWG.
Chuck
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Lise Fuhr *Sent:* Friday, December 05, 2014 8:34 AM *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* [CWG-Stewardship] Principles
Dear All,
We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call.
Best regards,
Martin and Lise
------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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
Greg's latest edits look good to me. I get the impression though that I should not have been checking the agree box for specific changes. My apologies if that created any confusion. I think we are ready for a new clean version of the principles because it is getting fairly messy in Google Docs. It certainly would seem helpful to have a new clean version at least 24 hours in advance of Thursday's CWG call. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 8:34 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles Dear All, We hereby send you a redline and a clean version of the Principles document. For the unresolved part, staff has done a table. We recommend that we focus on the outstanding issues, that are identified in the comments. We welcome any inputs on either the comments or on the redline draft. The document will be finalized on the next call. Best regards, Martin and Lise
participants (5)
-
Gomes, Chuck -
Greg Shatan -
Lise Fuhr -
Milton L Mueller -
WUKnoben