As regards the assessment of the implementation of the process the GAC and the GNSO agrees at the end, I tend to favour the option of forming a new group with some members of the old one, but the majority being new. Maybe, I´m wrong but old members might defend the solutions they proposed and be less critical of their work. Regards, Gema -----Mensaje original----- De: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] En nombre de Manal Ismail Enviado el: lunes, 20 de enero de 2014 21:29 Para: Ana Neves; Mike O'Connor CC: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org Asunto: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Charter - Final version .. Many thanks Mikey for the reminder .. Like Ana, I see the merit behind the 'middle ground' option, which implies some further commitment to ensure that our set of recommendations works well in practice .. Yet, I see this more of a solution aspect rather than a charter one .. I like the current focused mandate, limited timeline and suggested milestones as stated in the charter .. When we come to compiling our recommendations, we can then include one that stresses the need for post-implementation assessment and fine tuning .. This assessment can be done by this consultation group, a smaller group, a totally new one, a mix of old and new members or any other options as agreed by then .. Looking forward to hearing what other colleagues think .. Kind Regards --Manal -----Original Message----- From: Ana Neves [mailto:Ana.Neves@fct.pt] Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 4:21 PM To: Mike O'Connor Cc: Manal Ismail; gac-gnso-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Charter - Final version .. Thanks, Mikey. I world be in favour to the "middle ground" proposal for the timeline as it would allow,?as you well said, a post-implementation assessment. What we're trying to build here is not an easy task and could be very useful to follow the process at least for 2 years. My humble opinion at this stage... Best, Ana Sent from my iPhone On 20/01/2014, at 13:01, "Mike O'Connor" <mike@haven2.com<mailto:mike@haven2.com>> wrote: there's one thing i forgot to add to that draft. we had a discussion about how long this committee should last. an idea came to me this morning that would represent a middle option between two extremes. short extreme - we wrap up after our recommendations have been accepted by the GAC and the GNSO middle ground - we wrap up after our recommendations have gone through a post-implementation assessment (1-2 years out) long extreme - we continue on as a standing committee i think part of the reason i forgot to add this to the "timeline" section is because i wasn't clear what our view was - so maybe we could have a quick discussion about this on the list before the meeting tomorrow? mikey On Jan 20, 2014, at 6:35 AM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg<mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg>> wrote: Many thanks Mikey !! We, Jonathan and I, have added the signing off of the charter to tomorrow's conference call agenda, which I will be circulating shortly .. Hope everyone will be ready to adopt the charter by then .. Kind Regards --Manal From: Mike O'Connor [mailto:mike@haven2.com] Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 3:07 PM To: Manal Ismail; Marika Konings Cc: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Charter - Final version .. hi all, oops - i didn't structure the action items in my notes from our last call very well, so i didn't put a trigger in there reminding myself to update and circulate the draft. here's a draft for people to review, based on the notes from that call. my mistake, sorry about that. mikey PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) _______________________________________________ Gac-gnso-cg mailing list Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org<mailto:Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg _______________________________________________ Gac-gnso-cg mailing list Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg