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
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
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
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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
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
I understand. But has this already been sent on? Best, Elisa From: Tony Holmes [mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 12:17 PM To: Elisa Cooper; 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade' Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting 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> [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> [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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
I believe so, but David is the best person to answer that. Tony From: Elisa Cooper [mailto:Elisa.Cooper@markmonitor.com] Sent: 26 January 2015 19:19 To: 'Tony Holmes'; 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade' Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; 'gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org'; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting I understand. But has this already been sent on? Best, Elisa From: Tony Holmes [mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 12:17 PM To: Elisa Cooper; 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade' Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting 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
Yes, this has already been passed on to the board. Regards David On 27 Jan 2015, at 6:52 am, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes@btinternet.com> wrote:
I believe so, but David is the best person to answer that. Tony
From: Elisa Cooper [mailto:Elisa.Cooper@markmonitor.com] Sent: 26 January 2015 19:19 To: 'Tony Holmes'; 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade' Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; 'gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org'; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting
I understand.
But has this already been sent on?
Best, Elisa
From: Tony Holmes [mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 12:17 PM To: Elisa Cooper; 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade' Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting
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
Dear Markus, On an IPC membership call today, I was asked whether the Board had made any response to the statement sent to it by the participants in the NCPH intersessional meeting earlier this month, and specifically whether it was planning to publish the statement on the ICANN website, e.g. as correspondence. Thanks in advance for any light you can shed on these questions. Steve Metalitz, IPC Acting President From: gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of David Cake Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 10:50 PM To: Tony Holmes Cc: Benedetta Rossi; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; Robert Hoggarth Subject: Re: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting Yes, this has already been passed on to the board. Regards David On 27 Jan 2015, at 6:52 am, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes@btinternet.com<mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com>> wrote: I believe so, but David is the best person to answer that. Tony From: Elisa Cooper [mailto:Elisa.Cooper@markmonitor.com] Sent: 26 January 2015 19:19 To: 'Tony Holmes'; 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade' Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; 'gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org>'; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting I understand. But has this already been sent on? Best, Elisa From: Tony Holmes [mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 12:17 PM To: Elisa Cooper; 'David Cake'; 'Marilyn Cade' Cc: 'Benedetta Rossi'; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org>; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting 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> [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<mailto: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> [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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
Gnso-ncph-leadership mailing list Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ncph-leadership
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 ElisaIt 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.BestTony 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 CooperVP Product MarketingMarkMonitor, Part of Thomson Reuters Elisa CooperChair 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
Marilyn I have no intention of looking for Constituency support, don't feel it's appropriate or needed. If this was going to be a Constituency supported document it needed to be circulated beforehand. Unless there's full NCPH support , which we may not achieve, asking Constituencies is not at all helpful. As you say, it was a strong message in its own right. Tony From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com] Sent: 26 January 2015 19:21 To: Tony Holmes; 'Elisa Cooper'; 'David Cake' Cc: Benedetta Rossi; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting 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
Thanks, Tony, for the quick clarification. M From: tonyarholmes@btinternet.com To: marilynscade@hotmail.com; elisa.cooper@markmonitor.com; dave@difference.com.au 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 19:57:49 +0000 MarilynI have no intention of looking for Constituency support, don’t feel it’s appropriate or needed.If this was going to be a Constituency supported document it needed to be circulated beforehand.Unless there’s full NCPH support , which we may not achieve, asking Constituencies is not at all helpful.As you say, it was a strong message in its own right.Tony From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com] Sent: 26 January 2015 19:21 To: Tony Holmes; 'Elisa Cooper'; 'David Cake' Cc: Benedetta Rossi; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting 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. MFrom: 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 +0000Hi ElisaIt 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.BestTony 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 CooperVP Product MarketingMarkMonitor, Part of Thomson Reuters Elisa CooperChair 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
The decision was made at the NCPH meeting to send it on from participants at that meeting, and so constituency support was not sought, and the letter makes that clear. There would be absolutely nothing wrong with creating a second statement in support, and seeking constituency endorsement for that. Regards David On 27 Jan 2015, at 6:57 am, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes@btinternet.com> wrote:
Marilyn I have no intention of looking for Constituency support, don’t feel it’s appropriate or needed. If this was going to be a Constituency supported document it needed to be circulated beforehand. Unless there’s full NCPH support , which we may not achieve, asking Constituencies is not at all helpful. As you say, it was a strong message in its own right. Tony
From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com] Sent: 26 January 2015 19:21 To: Tony Holmes; 'Elisa Cooper'; 'David Cake' Cc: Benedetta Rossi; gnso-ncph-leadership@icann.org; 'Robert Hoggarth' Subject: RE: [Gnso-ncph-leadership] Statement from NCPH meeting
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
participants (6)
-
Avri Doria -
David Cake -
Elisa Cooper -
Marilyn Cade -
Metalitz, Steven -
Tony Holmes