Fwd: [council] GNSO letter to the ICANN Boardregarding Public Participation

[Mary Wong]

Adam and everyone,
 
I am sorry that I did not realize the deadline was 11.50 UTC, so we did not manage to get our suggestions incorporated in time. Nonetheless, both Bill Drake and I have volunteered to be on any working group or other grouping that works, within and for the GNSO, on further actions and recommendations regarding public participation in ICANN. As such, I will say that we will do our utmost to relay - and incorporate - all of each of your concerns and suggestions into the process and outcome of this particular activity.
 
Please continue to send your thoughts, suggestions and concerns to me, Bill and/or the list. We very much appreciate the feedback, and would very much like to be able to present as representative and as full a panoply of possibilities as we can muster.
 
Best regards,
Mary
 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu 
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php 
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 


>>> Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> 2/4/2009 11:45 PM >>>
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-Description: HTML
>
>In addition to Adam's suggestion (extract 
>below), how would folks feel about adding 
>something along the lines of "It is also 
>important to bear in mind that these 
>communications should complement, and not 
>substitute for, direct public engagement with 
>the ICANN Board."
>
>Please note that comments can be submitted only 
>up till 11.59 tonight (I am assuming this is 
>either PST or EST - can anyone confirm it?)
>


23:59 UTC.

Bill's email said:

At 11:37 AM +0100 2/4/09, William Drake wrote:
>
>Do NCUC people have any comments on the attached 
>letter?  if so they're due by 23:59 UTC today. 
>I'll be offline traveling so if yes please send 
>to Carlos or Mary.
>
>BD
>

I hope someone submitted the changes (now about 5 hours beyond the deadline.)

Adam




>Cheers
>Mary
>
>Mary W S Wong
>Professor of Law
>Franklin Pierce Law Center
>Two White Street
>Concord, NH 03301
>USA
>Email: <mailto:mwong at piercelaw.edu>mwong at piercelaw.edu 
>Phone: 1-603-513-5143
>Webpage: 
><http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php>http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php 
>Selected writings available on the Social 
>Science Research Network (SSRN) at: 
><http://ssrn.com/author=437584>http://ssrn.com/author=437584 
>
>
>>>>  Adam Peake <ajp at GLOCOM.AC.JP> 2/4/2009 11:57 AM >>>
>Important that the person asking has the
>opportunity to agree to having their question
>taken in that way.
>
>Perhaps add a sentence so the relevant part reads:
>
>It is also noted that ICANN staff, under
>direction of the Chairman, allowed for questions
>to be posted after the Meeting and subsequently
>answered by appropriate staff. The GNSO Council
>applauds this innovation particularly with the
>staff providing responses to direct questions.
>*However, questions should only be deferred in
>this way with the agreement of the person asking
>the question during the open forum.*
>
>Make sense?
>
>Adam

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090204/d103f748/attachment.html>