PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week
Dear Members, Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting. As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC – note that there’s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call. Thank you! Cheers Mary
I will also be at NamesCon. Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC – note that there’s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers Mary _______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
During today's call, some folks felt that the call scheduled for next week should still be held, despite some folks being unable due to their attendance at the large NamesCon event, as "there are always some folks who can't make it." However, I'd like to remind people that back in May 2016 we cancelled a working group call due to INTA having their Orlando meeting: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2016-May/000291.html So, it would only be fair, in my opinion, that next week's call be cancelled. [the conflict doesn't affect me personally, by the way; I can make it next week] If it's not cancelled, then the next time there's a conflict with an INTA meeting, we should not change our own schedule to accommodate those going to INTA events. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Paul Keating <paul@law.es> wrote:
I will also be at NamesCon.
Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC – note that there’s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
Hi George - I think that was my comment so thanks for pointing that out. I did not recall the cancellation for INTA but with that in mind if a similar large number of people would be missing the call for NamesCon I agree it seems reasonable to cancel. I do think it does depend on the volume of participants for whom the event is a factor (regardless of which event it happens to be). In this case we need to take into account that this is the call scheduled to be more convenient for those in AsPac timezones, who maybe won't be going to NamesCon (I have no idea whether they will or not). The conflict equally doesn't affect me since I can't join a call at 4am, so my absence from the call has nothing to do with NamesCon. Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd E: susan.payne@valideus.com D: +44 20 7421 8255 T: +44 20 7421 8299 M: +44 7971 661175 -----Original Message----- From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: 19 January 2017 00:50 To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week During today's call, some folks felt that the call scheduled for next week should still be held, despite some folks being unable due to their attendance at the large NamesCon event, as "there are always some folks who can't make it." However, I'd like to remind people that back in May 2016 we cancelled a working group call due to INTA having their Orlando meeting: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2016-May/000291.html So, it would only be fair, in my opinion, that next week's call be cancelled. [the conflict doesn't affect me personally, by the way; I can make it next week] If it's not cancelled, then the next time there's a conflict with an INTA meeting, we should not change our own schedule to accommodate those going to INTA events. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Paul Keating <paul@law.es> wrote:
I will also be at NamesCon.
Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC – note that there’s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
For what its worth, my 2 Cents: We created the different timing for the call (which I supported and continue to support). However, I would like to see some indication of the number of people on those calls. This is not with the idea of cancelling them. Rather, we might want to adopt a policy of NOT reaching definitive decisions on EITHER of the calls (Asia vs non-Asia) so that those unable to participate in either can have input prior to making group decisions. The alternative would be to solicit group email comments on specific points pending decision. I realize this may make things more complicated but it has the attraction of ensuring maximum participation formulating consensus-driven decisions. Paul On 1/19/17, 11:09 AM, "Susan Payne" <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of susan.payne@valideus.com> wrote:
Hi George - I think that was my comment so thanks for pointing that out. I did not recall the cancellation for INTA but with that in mind if a similar large number of people would be missing the call for NamesCon I agree it seems reasonable to cancel. I do think it does depend on the volume of participants for whom the event is a factor (regardless of which event it happens to be). In this case we need to take into account that this is the call scheduled to be more convenient for those in AsPac timezones, who maybe won't be going to NamesCon (I have no idea whether they will or not). The conflict equally doesn't affect me since I can't join a call at 4am, so my absence from the call has nothing to do with NamesCon.
Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd
E: susan.payne@valideus.com D: +44 20 7421 8255 T: +44 20 7421 8299 M: +44 7971 661175
-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: 19 January 2017 00:50 To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week
During today's call, some folks felt that the call scheduled for next week should still be held, despite some folks being unable due to their attendance at the large NamesCon event, as "there are always some folks who can't make it." However, I'd like to remind people that back in May 2016 we cancelled a working group call due to INTA having their Orlando meeting:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2016-May/000291.html
So, it would only be fair, in my opinion, that next week's call be cancelled. [the conflict doesn't affect me personally, by the way; I can make it next week]
If it's not cancelled, then the next time there's a conflict with an INTA meeting, we should not change our own schedule to accommodate those going to INTA events.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Paul Keating <paul@law.es> wrote:
I will also be at NamesCon.
Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC note that there¹s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
If I may follow up, an additional benefit of not making decisions on a single call is that it makes it easier for participants who may have difficulties expressing their views during a meeting (because of a lack of confidence in their English speaking abilities for instance) to submit inputs in writing in between meetings. Best Mathieu -----Message d'origine----- De : gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Paul Keating Envoyé : jeudi 19 janvier 2017 14:11 À : Susan Payne; George Kirikos; gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Objet : Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week For what its worth, my 2 Cents: We created the different timing for the call (which I supported and continue to support). However, I would like to see some indication of the number of people on those calls. This is not with the idea of cancelling them. Rather, we might want to adopt a policy of NOT reaching definitive decisions on EITHER of the calls (Asia vs non-Asia) so that those unable to participate in either can have input prior to making group decisions. The alternative would be to solicit group email comments on specific points pending decision. I realize this may make things more complicated but it has the attraction of ensuring maximum participation formulating consensus-driven decisions. Paul On 1/19/17, 11:09 AM, "Susan Payne" <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of susan.payne@valideus.com> wrote:
Hi George - I think that was my comment so thanks for pointing that out. I did not recall the cancellation for INTA but with that in mind if a similar large number of people would be missing the call for NamesCon I agree it seems reasonable to cancel. I do think it does depend on the volume of participants for whom the event is a factor (regardless of which event it happens to be). In this case we need to take into account that this is the call scheduled to be more convenient for those in AsPac timezones, who maybe won't be going to NamesCon (I have no idea whether they will or not). The conflict equally doesn't affect me since I can't join a call at 4am, so my absence from the call has nothing to do with NamesCon.
Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd
E: susan.payne@valideus.com D: +44 20 7421 8255 T: +44 20 7421 8299 M: +44 7971 661175
-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: 19 January 2017 00:50 To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week
During today's call, some folks felt that the call scheduled for next week should still be held, despite some folks being unable due to their attendance at the large NamesCon event, as "there are always some folks who can't make it." However, I'd like to remind people that back in May 2016 we cancelled a working group call due to INTA having their Orlando meeting:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2016-May/000291.html
So, it would only be fair, in my opinion, that next week's call be cancelled. [the conflict doesn't affect me personally, by the way; I can make it next week]
If it's not cancelled, then the next time there's a conflict with an INTA meeting, we should not change our own schedule to accommodate those going to INTA events.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Paul Keating <paul@law.es> wrote:
I will also be at NamesCon.
Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC note that there¹s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
Decisions should never be made without opportunity for feedback from the mail list. There are relatively few people ever on a call, compared to the number of people on this list. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
If I may follow up, an additional benefit of not making decisions on a single call is that it makes it easier for participants who may have difficulties expressing their views during a meeting (because of a lack of confidence in their English speaking abilities for instance) to submit inputs in writing in between meetings.
Best Mathieu
-----Message d'origine----- De : gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Paul Keating Envoyé : jeudi 19 janvier 2017 14:11 À : Susan Payne; George Kirikos; gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Objet : Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week
For what its worth, my 2 Cents:
We created the different timing for the call (which I supported and continue to support). However, I would like to see some indication of the number of people on those calls. This is not with the idea of cancelling them. Rather, we might want to adopt a policy of NOT reaching definitive decisions on EITHER of the calls (Asia vs non-Asia) so that those unable to participate in either can have input prior to making group decisions. The alternative would be to solicit group email comments on specific points pending decision. I realize this may make things more complicated but it has the attraction of ensuring maximum participation formulating consensus-driven decisions.
Paul
On 1/19/17, 11:09 AM, "Susan Payne" <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of susan.payne@valideus.com> wrote:
Hi George - I think that was my comment so thanks for pointing that out. I did not recall the cancellation for INTA but with that in mind if a similar large number of people would be missing the call for NamesCon I agree it seems reasonable to cancel. I do think it does depend on the volume of participants for whom the event is a factor (regardless of which event it happens to be). In this case we need to take into account that this is the call scheduled to be more convenient for those in AsPac timezones, who maybe won't be going to NamesCon (I have no idea whether they will or not). The conflict equally doesn't affect me since I can't join a call at 4am, so my absence from the call has nothing to do with NamesCon.
Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd
E: susan.payne@valideus.com D: +44 20 7421 8255 T: +44 20 7421 8299 M: +44 7971 661175
-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: 19 January 2017 00:50 To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week
During today's call, some folks felt that the call scheduled for next week should still be held, despite some folks being unable due to their attendance at the large NamesCon event, as "there are always some folks who can't make it." However, I'd like to remind people that back in May 2016 we cancelled a working group call due to INTA having their Orlando meeting:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2016-May/000291.html
So, it would only be fair, in my opinion, that next week's call be cancelled. [the conflict doesn't affect me personally, by the way; I can make it next week]
If it's not cancelled, then the next time there's a conflict with an INTA meeting, we should not change our own schedule to accommodate those going to INTA events.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Paul Keating <paul@law.es> wrote:
I will also be at NamesCon.
Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC note that there¹s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
We have not made any final decisions based upon a single call and without extensive email list discussion. Indeed, we’ve been quite clear that even when we make decisions they remain open to being revisited, and that nothing is final until we complete a final report and recommendations. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 1:50 PM To: Mathieu Weill Cc: David A. Tait Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week Decisions should never be made without opportunity for feedback from the mail list. There are relatively few people ever on a call, compared to the number of people on this list. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: If I may follow up, an additional benefit of not making decisions on a single call is that it makes it easier for participants who may have difficulties expressing their views during a meeting (because of a lack of confidence in their English speaking abilities for instance) to submit inputs in writing in between meetings. Best Mathieu -----Message d'origine----- De : gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org>] De la part de Paul Keating Envoyé : jeudi 19 janvier 2017 14:11 À : Susan Payne; George Kirikos; gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Objet : Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week For what its worth, my 2 Cents: We created the different timing for the call (which I supported and continue to support). However, I would like to see some indication of the number of people on those calls. This is not with the idea of cancelling them. Rather, we might want to adopt a policy of NOT reaching definitive decisions on EITHER of the calls (Asia vs non-Asia) so that those unable to participate in either can have input prior to making group decisions. The alternative would be to solicit group email comments on specific points pending decision. I realize this may make things more complicated but it has the attraction of ensuring maximum participation formulating consensus-driven decisions. Paul On 1/19/17, 11:09 AM, "Susan Payne" <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of susan.payne@valideus.com<mailto:susan.payne@valideus.com>> wrote:
Hi George - I think that was my comment so thanks for pointing that out. I did not recall the cancellation for INTA but with that in mind if a similar large number of people would be missing the call for NamesCon I agree it seems reasonable to cancel. I do think it does depend on the volume of participants for whom the event is a factor (regardless of which event it happens to be). In this case we need to take into account that this is the call scheduled to be more convenient for those in AsPac timezones, who maybe won't be going to NamesCon (I have no idea whether they will or not). The conflict equally doesn't affect me since I can't join a call at 4am, so my absence from the call has nothing to do with NamesCon.
Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd
E: susan.payne@valideus.com<mailto:susan.payne@valideus.com> D: +44 20 7421 8255<tel:%2B44%2020%207421%208255> T: +44 20 7421 8299<tel:%2B44%2020%207421%208299> M: +44 7971 661175<tel:%2B44%207971%20661175>
-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: 19 January 2017 00:50 To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] PLEASE CONSIDER A REPLY: Proposed Working Group call next week
During today's call, some folks felt that the call scheduled for next week should still be held, despite some folks being unable due to their attendance at the large NamesCon event, as "there are always some folks who can't make it." However, I'd like to remind people that back in May 2016 we cancelled a working group call due to INTA having their Orlando meeting:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2016-May/000291.html
So, it would only be fair, in my opinion, that next week's call be cancelled. [the conflict doesn't affect me personally, by the way; I can make it next week]
If it's not cancelled, then the next time there's a conflict with an INTA meeting, we should not change our own schedule to accommodate those going to INTA events.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269<tel:416-588-0269> http://www.leap.com/
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Paul Keating <paul@law.es<mailto:paul@law.es>> wrote:
I will also be at NamesCon.
Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC note that there¹s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com/email-signature> Version: 2016.0.7996 / Virus Database: 4749/13754 - Release Date: 01/12/17 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
I am fine cancelling the meeting. I want to make sure that we are equitable to all. If we cannot get a critical mass, we should cancel. J. Scott Evans | Associate General Counsel - Trademarks, Copyright, Domains & Marketing | Adobe 345 Park Avenue San Jose, CA 95110 408.536.5336 (tel), 408.709.6162 (cell) jsevans@adobe.com www.adobe.com On 1/18/17, 4:50 PM, "gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of George Kirikos" <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of icann@leap.com> wrote:
During today's call, some folks felt that the call scheduled for next week should still be held, despite some folks being unable due to their attendance at the large NamesCon event, as "there are always some folks who can't make it." However, I'd like to remind people that back in May 2016 we cancelled a working group call due to INTA having their Orlando meeting:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2016-May/000291.html
So, it would only be fair, in my opinion, that next week's call be cancelled. [the conflict doesn't affect me personally, by the way; I can make it next week]
If it's not cancelled, then the next time there's a conflict with an INTA meeting, we should not change our own schedule to accommodate those going to INTA events.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Paul Keating <paul@law.es> wrote:
I will also be at NamesCon.
Sent from my iPad
On 18 Jan 2017, at 21:23, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Members,
Those Members who were present at the Working Group meeting held earlier today agreed to go ahead with the meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. In view, however, of the fact that quite a few Members will be traveling to NamesCon at that time, coupled with its being the first meeting time that is rotating to 0400 UTC, it will be helpful if we can get a sense of how many Members will not be able to attend the meeting.
As such, please take a moment to reply to me if you know you will NOT be on the call next Wednesday at 0400 UTC note that there¹s no need to Reply All or reply at all if you plan to be on the call.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
participants (8)
-
George Kirikos -
J. Scott Evans -
Mary Wong -
Mathieu Weill -
Mike Rodenbaugh -
Paul Keating -
Phil Corwin -
Susan Payne