Thanks Ariel. I agree too, this makes sense, and I’d think they know better (as a rule :). Re 2, I understand the point as the need not to put too much emphasis on what was done to deal with one past contentious case; as it may be done differently for future ones - point well taken. Apologies for missing this afternoon’s call. Regards, Philippe From: GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT [mailto:gnso-pdp3dot0-dt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 2:57 PM To: Marie Pattullo; Ariel Liang; gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT] Final Call: Review Improvements $9 & #15 by Wednesday, 20 November I agree Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [signature_1295071146]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo@aim.be> Date: Tuesday, 19 November 2019 at 13:46 To: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org>, "gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org" <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT] Final Call: Review Improvements $9 & #15 by Wednesday, 20 November Thanks Ariel; I see no reason why we should not simply accept all of the Ombudsman’s proposals – they make complete sense. M From: GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Ariel Liang Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 6:57 PM To: gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT] Final Call: Review Improvements $9 & #15 by Wednesday, 20 November Dear all, This is to let you know that the Ombudsman provided some input to the language concerning his potential involvement when a disagreement / conflict happens in a GNSO WG. Per his input, the implementation documents for Improvements #9 & #15 have been updated. You can see the redline edits on #9 document as follows: 1. Added the sentence “Elements of confidentiality may be invoked when the Ombudsman is involved in a proceeding” at the end of the first paragraph about the Ombudsman (Section 3.3 on page 10). 2. Deleted the reference to a previous case when the Ombudsman was involved in a GNSO WG matter (second paragraph in Section 3.3 on pages 10-11). 3. Replaced “lodge a complaint with the Ombudsman” and “bring in the Ombudsman” with “lodge the issue and engage with the Ombudsman” consistently throughout the document. #15 document reflects the same changes per points 1) & 2) above. We are waiting for input from ICANN Legal and ICANN Complaints Officer, if any. Thank you, Ariel From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org<mailto:ariel.liang@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 5:31 PM To: "gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org>" <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org>> Subject: Final Call: Review Improvements $9 & #15 by Wednesday, 20 November Dear all, We hope this message finds you well, and hope those who have traveled back home from Montreal had an uneventful trip! Following the working session on Monday, 4 November, staff have updated the documents for Package 4 Improvements #9 and #15, incorporating input and suggestions received from the Small Team: #9 Clarification to Complaint Process in GNSO Working Group Guidelines: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pIHFupCdXoH3BSgRfu6KbzUm2jt1AQ-_MEk0JeMG... #15 Independent Conflict Resolution: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yq__EGRYmicTGEOoZPqh6FdsXWNzFblqWwZkXhPb... Please provide your final input by COB Wednesday, 20 November. In absence of concerns/objections, staff will coordinate with the Small Team lead to finalize the Package 4 documents and send to the GNSO Council no later than Friday, 22 November. == Please note: Improvement #15 has incorporated all Pam’s suggested edits and the document is now in clean format. Improvement #9: * You should be able to see all substantive updates in redline; editorial suggestions have already been accepted directly (e.g., replacing “dispute” with “disagreement” throughout the document). * Per action items<https://community.icann.org/x/vIEzBw> from the 22 October meeting, staff also shared the draft document with the Ombudsman, ICANN Legal, Conflict Resolution Specialist, and Complaints Officer, seeking feedback (if any) for the proposed language about their potential roles in Section 3.7 complaint proceedings. The Conflict Resolution Specialist already provided updated/approved language regarding her job duty/mandate, which has been incorporated in redline. Any further feedback received from the Ombudsman, ICANN Legal, and Complaints Officer should be reflected in the documents for both #9 and #15 for consistency purpose. * Improvement #9 also includes a briefing document<https://drive.google.com/a/icann.org/file/d/1o8732tPyRh6PnER76VlT984HCLfovnE...> on the concept of consensus in PDP. This briefing document does not require additional work/review by the Small Team, as it will be absorbed by the consensus playbook to be developed by the external vendor for Improvement #4. Thank you, Julie & Ariel _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.