[Membership-affairs] {SPAM} Re: [NCUC-EC] point on the membership survey

[Stephanie Perrin]

Please, lets get it out.  Perfect being the enemy of the good and all 
that....it is fine.  Send it out!!!!!
thanks for all the work Walid!
cheers Stephanie

On 2015-03-06 10:22, Walid AL-SAQAF wrote:
>
> Sure thing Bill. If you and the other folks on the list are happy with 
> it as it stands, I don't see any reason to delay much longer.
>
> BTW, good work at the review meeting the other day;)
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Walid
>
> On Mar 6, 2015 3:52 PM, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com 
> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi
>
>     So now that we’re over the Singapore hump, should we be looking to
>     get the finalized version of this survey off the ground?
>
>     Bill
>
>>     On Feb 23, 2015, at 2:39 PM, Walid AL-SAQAF <wsaqaf at GMAIL.COM
>>     <mailto:wsaqaf at GMAIL.COM>> wrote:
>>
>>     Thanks Amr,
>>
>>     This is quite useful. I would rather keep all WGs even if you
>>     aren't sure are active. I'll just change the question than to
>>     working groups that are related to GNSO so as to remain factually
>>     correct. As for the name of the review committee. That's the way
>>     it appears on the official page here:
>>     http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/projects-list.pdf. But upon
>>     checking the link, it looks like the name you provide is the
>>     active one. So it makes sense to change it to that name.
>>
>>
>>
>>     Sincerely,
>>
>>     Walid
>>
>>     -----------------
>>
>>     Walid Al-Saqaf, PhD
>>
>>     On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org
>>     <mailto:aelsadr at egyptig.org>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi,
>>
>>         On Feb 23, 2015, at 9:44 AM, Walid AL-SAQAF <wsaqaf at gmail.com
>>         <mailto:wsaqaf at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         [SNIP]
>>
>>>         *Just so we don't spend too much more time on this, could
>>>         you do me a favor and point out that the below active list
>>>         is what we want to include in the survey? Is there anything
>>>         else missing, incorrect, or needs removal?*
>>>         *
>>>         *
>>>         *_GNSO Working Groups:_*
>>>
>>>          1. *Curative Rights Protections for IGO/INGOs (IGO-INGO-CRP)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Active
>>>
>>>          2. *Discussion Group – New gTLD Subsequent Rounds (ngTLDs-DG)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Active
>>>
>>>          3. *GAC-GNSO Consultation Group on Early Engagement
>>>             (GAC-GNSO-CG)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         This is Active, and although its charter was adopted by the
>>         GNSO council and the GAC, it isn't a GNSO WG per se. Just a
>>         consultation group consisting of some GNSO councillors and
>>         GAC members. It isn’t open to participation/membership.
>>>
>>>          4. *Geo Regions Review Community-wide WG
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Not sure if this is active, or not. I don’t believe it is. It
>>         submitted a draft final report years ago, but I don’t know if
>>         this was followed up, or not.
>>>
>>>          5. *GNSO Data & Metrics for Policy Making WG
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Active
>>>
>>>          6. *GNSO PDP Improvements Discussion Group (PDP-IMPR)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         I’m not aware of this being active. I might have missed it.
>>>
>>>          7. *GNSO Review Committee (REVIEW)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Not sure what this is, but you may mean the GNSO Review
>>         Working Party (
>>>
>>>          8. *GNSO Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation
>>>             (SCI)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Not a GNSO WG, but a standing committee chartered by the GNSO
>>         Council.
>>>
>>>          9. *Policy & Implementation WG (POLIMP)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Active
>>>
>>>         10. *RAA Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues WG
>>>             (PPSAI)
>>>             *
>>>
>>         Active
>>>
>>>         11. *Translation/Transliteration of Internationalized
>>>             Registration Data WG (T&T)*
>>>
>>         Active
>>
>>         I don’t know wether or not you want to point out that numbers
>>         1, 10 and 11 are GNSO PDP working groups, as opposed to 5 and
>>         9 that are GNSO (non-PDP) working groups.
>>
>>         Thanks.
>>
>>         Amr
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Membership-affairs mailing list
>>     Membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org
>>     <mailto:Membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org>
>>     http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/membership-affairs
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Membership-affairs mailing list
> Membership-affairs at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/membership-affairs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/membership-affairs/attachments/20150307/4afe7de8/attachment-0002.html>