Thanks, Tony, I just responded to Elisa on this.  

Do you want to try to gather individual Constituency endorsements?
I am not sure that is needed, but am asking for clarification from you and others on NCPH leadership list.

I think that the sense of the participants was that the document was from the room, so to speak, and as it 
was 8 per Constituency, inclusive of officers from each Constituency, that was still a powerful message.

M

From: tonyarholmes@btinternet.com
To: Elisa.Cooper@markmonitor.com; dave@difference.com.au; marilynscade@hotmail.com
CC: benedetta.rossi@icann.org; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; robert.hoggarth@icann.org
Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 19:17:07 +0000

Hi Elisa

It was made clear at the meeting and in the letter that this is not sent on behalf of the Constituencies but by all those who attended that meeting in their individual capacity.

There is no constituency sign on.

Best

Tony

 

From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Elisa Cooper
Sent: 26 January 2015 19:05
To: 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade'
Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; 'gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org'; 'Robert Hoggarth'
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting

 

Just for clarification – has the attached letter been sent to the BOD and Review Team?

 

I’d like to send this on to BC members before we sign onto this.

 

Best,

Elisa

 

Elisa Cooper

VP Product Marketing

MarkMonitor, Part of Thomson Reuters

 

Elisa Cooper

Chair

ICANN Business Constituency

 

208 389-5779 PH

 

 

 

From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of David Cake
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 9:47 PM
To: Marilyn Cade
Cc: Benedetta Rossi; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; Robert Hoggarth
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting

 

Please find the final draft, as sent to the Board, attached.

David


On 17 Jan 2015, at 7:41 am, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I love the chained at birth analogy, Avri!
>
> I was also looking for the language of the joint statement. Dave, Tony, do one of you have it?
> Or Bene, did staff capture it, perhaps, from the webex?
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Jan 16, 2015, at 3:19 PM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> (trying this list as it was mentioned in the house meeting - though i do not know if everyone there is on the list)
>>
>> Can someone post the  final copy of the letter to this list? 
>> Would like to forward it to the GNSO Review Team as well.
>>
>> Something I sent to the GNSO Review Team list:
>>
>>>
>>> Another thing that was mentioned to me that we might want to explore.  An unnamed member of the staff did wonder why we wait around on the review and on the SIC for revisions to the GNSO structure &c.  Why, if we do our own review and figure out the changes we want to make, doesn't the GNSO just tell the the SIC what we want.
>>>
>>> I had to answer that I did not know why we show so little initiative, and started to feel that maybe the GNSO is like one of those elephants that are chained at birth when they can't break the chain and remain chained as adults even though they could easily break the chains.
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> avri
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list
>> Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list
> Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership