Dear Kurt:

Thanks for the schedule notes that you mentioned at the top of today’s meeting: 

• Tomorrow: a draft report goes out to the team
• Next week: Kurt begins consensus measuring work
• Next week: team begins review of open items

Questions:

• When do you expect a Final Report draft to be delivered to participants for their final review?
• When do you expect the Final Report to be delivered to Council?
• What is the schedule for the “Phase 2” work?

Thanks,

--Greg

From: Greg Aaron <greg@illumintel.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 4:44 PM
To: 'EPDP' <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org>
Cc: 'Kurt Pritz' <kurt@kjpritz.com>
Subject: schedule for completing our work?

Dear Kurt:

As some have mentioned on the list, time to deliver the Final Report is rapidly approaching, and it will be difficult to squeeze yet more hours out of the team. On behalf of SSAC I'm requesting your view about what the schedule will look like between now and delivery of the Final Report to Council.

It’s our understanding that the GNSO operating guidelines and the EPDP charter oblige the WG to deliver certain things in the Final Report, which the WG team will need prepare in the next few weeks.  The language of some of the Recommendations continues to evolve, so we are wondering at what point everyone puts down their pencils and participants will be able to review the proposed final Recommendation language.  It seems that only at that point will it be possible to confirm consensus levels.  

Some of the tasks still to be accomplished are as follows.  What is your plan for the below?

1. "Each recommendation in the Final Report should be accompanied by the appropriate consensus level designation, per the Standard Methodology for Making Decisions".  When will the measuring or designation process take place, and what  process are your planning to use? 
2. "It is the role of the Chair to designate which level of consensus is reached and announce this designation to the Working Group. Member(s) of the Working Group should be able to challenge the designation of the Chair as part of the Working Group discussion." 
3. "In cases of Consensus, Strong support but significant opposition, and No Consensus, an effort should be made to document that variance in viewpoint and to present any Minority View recommendations that may have been made.  Documentation of Minority View recommendations normally depends on text offered by the proponent(s). In all cases of Divergence, the WG Chair should encourage the submission of minority viewpoint(s)."

#3 above will require that the WG participants get some time with the draft Final Report to perform review and submit final notes.

If all of this has already been laid out to the team, please excuse me asking again.  (The schedule info I have been able to find looks out of date.)  Anyway, it seems like a good time to confirm this stuff to the team as we all push to the finish line together.

With best wishes,

--Greg