[NCUC-DISCUSS] Extended - IMPORTANT: [Call for volunteers] ICANNFellowship Program Community Consultation

Thu Apr 5 17:07:23 CEST 2018

Thank you Claudio,  glad we'll still be able to submit the views/ideas that
were expressed in the draft.

On Apr 5, 2018 5:53 PM, "Cláudio Lucena" <claudiokilla at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear fellows,
>
> I'm awfully sorry for not having made the available draft on time, and for
> commenting restrictions you might have had in the original document.
>
> As you might have seen, Farzaneh has made a very well structured response
> available, including some answers concerning a view that only more senior
> members could have. I am just transferring the ideas I had drafted to her
> document.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mwxyid-oll4bj6FaWXfq4S6mY-
> MFtgu79TQ7sxyfgB4/edit
>
>
> --
> Cláudio S. de Lucena Neto
>
> [image: cid:image001.png at 01D03AE9.ED675EB0]
>
>   [image:
> http://www.fd.lisboa.ucp.pt/site/resources/design/fdlogo-researchcenter.jpg]
>
>
> Visiting Research Fellow
>
> The Center for Cyber, Law and Policy, University of Haifa, Israel
>
> **
>
> PhD Candidate, Research Centre for the Future of Law
>
> Católica Global School of Law, Universidade Católica Portuguesa
>
> *
>
> Researcher, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
>
> Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior de Portugal
>
> *
>
> Professor of Law, Center for Legal Studies
>
> Paraíba State University (UEPB), Brazil
>
> LinkedIn: https://br.linkedin.com/pub/cláudio-lucena/22/7a8/822
>
> Universidade Estadual da Paraíba
>
> www.uepb.edu.br
> <https://br.linkedin.com/pub/cl%C3%A1udio-lucena/22/7a8/822>
>
> Centro de Ciências Jurídicas - Campus I
>
> Departamento de Direito Privado
>
> Rua Coronel Salvino de Figueiredo, 157
>
> CEP 58.400-253
>
> Campina Grande - PB - Brasil
>
> Fone/Fax: *55 83 3310 9753
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>
> This message, as well as any attached document, may contain information
> that is confidential and privileged and is intended only for the use of the
> addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or distribution of this email
> or attached documents, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of
> this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
> Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email by
> mistake.
>
>
> 2018-04-05 10:31 GMT-03:00 Benjamin Akinmoyeje <benakin at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi,
>> I have reviewed the document as well and I have looked to see the
>> responses to the questions asked apart from the statement from some
>> fellows. We can still do a better job of the comments. I thought there was
>> going to be responses to the document to which one can add or suggest
>> input.
>>
>> I am also guilty of not making contributions as I have been a fellow and
>> it's only appropriate to add my input if there is still a window of
>> opportunity.
>> We should work with the EC to issue a richer document is my view.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Benjamin
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 2:23 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The NCSG Chair has just shared a proposed comment which, in my opinion,
>>> is in good shape. I will propose a few suggested edits shortly as the
>>> document allows anyone to propose edits. However given the time crunch, and
>>> that the NCSG comment is in a more advanced state, I would suggest that it
>>> might be more appropriate for the NCSG to submit this instead, and
>>> therefore there is no need for the NCUC to submit a separate response.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Ayden
>>>
>>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 14:31, Liz Orembo <lizorembo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> To be honest, I have only done a quick glance at the doc now and I agree
>>> that there's still much that needs to be worked on.
>>>
>>> I don't know which liner I'm supposed to spare here... but in my
>>> comments above I noted the period that the access concerns were mentioned.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Liz,
>>>>
>>>> I feel like I am the only person responding to this exchange who has
>>>> clicked the link and read the proposed response. There is no way that this
>>>> is suitable for submission, and I have clicked the link several times over
>>>> the past fortnight -- *there was no text a few days ago*. So spare me
>>>> the line that there has been ample time for the prose to be reviewed,
>>>> because this is simply untrue. This is not a professional response, and
>>>> those of us who do expect the NCUC to submit professional responses will
>>>> continue to trickle away if we allow our standards to fall so low as to
>>>> submit this one. I do not intend for my comment to sound disrespectful, but
>>>> I'm sorry, this is not ready for submission.
>>>>
>>>> Ayden
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>>> On April 5, 2018 2:06 PM, Liz Orembo <lizorembo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I see the draft was shared 10 days ago and in the first email of this
>>>> thread, there were instructions to change settings to allow for comments
>>>> and suggestions. Considering that the deadline to submit comments is
>>>> tomorrow, I still think anyone can still input into the doc and the
>>>> penholders can work on incorporating comments into the draft.
>>>> If we had more time, I would suggest that the penholders compile and
>>>> summarise the comments received from fellows, for clarity and to protect
>>>> the identity of the fellows. (if that was the intention by hiding the
>>>> names)
>>>> @Ayden, I wish you raised the access concerns as soon as you
>>>> experienced the challenges.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Renata,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your message.
>>>>>
>>>>> I disagree that there have been "many interventions" to this document.
>>>>> The Google Doc is in read-only mode, and I was not granted edit access, so
>>>>> I have not been able to share my contributions to the proposed text.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of the 13 pages, 9 pages are copied and pasted from other sources and
>>>>> do not relate to the questionnaire at hand. Of the 19 questions we have
>>>>> been asked to answer, most (14) have not been responded to, and those 5
>>>>> with answers seem under-developed.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have already received one extension. This questionnaire was
>>>>> circulated on the NCSG list in January, and I do not believe the text that
>>>>> I see in the Google Doc today represents the view of the broader NCUC
>>>>> membership. I think it would be inappropriate for the EC to submit this,
>>>>> given the document has not been open to all members to edit, that the text
>>>>> is not final, and responses are not offered to a majority of the 19
>>>>> questions being asked.
>>>>>
>>>>> A fortnight ago I requested, very modestly, that the membership have
>>>>> at least 24 hours to review the final text before the EC considers
>>>>> endorsing and submitting it. I am disappointed that this will not be the
>>>>> case. This is not how we used to work.
>>>>>
>>>>> I respectfully suggest that this response is under-developed and not
>>>>> suitable for submission on behalf of the NCUC. This is not a criticism of
>>>>> anyone (I thank those who have worked on this document), it is just the
>>>>> reality that we can't meet the deadline.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ayden Férdeline
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>>>>
>>>>> On April 5, 2018 1:14 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi Ayden
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Yes, the deadline is 6th April.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'll send the document today to the EC.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > There are 13 pages on the document with many interventions.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I will try to get an extra extension for this comment but seems
>>>>> unlikely.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Best,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Renata
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>> >
>>>>> > https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Best regards.
>>>> Liz.
>>>>
>>>> PGP ID: 0x1F3488BF
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Best regards.
>>> Liz.
>>>
>>> PGP ID: 0x1F3488BF
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20180405/20a5c919/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2647 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20180405/20a5c919/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10669 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20180405/20a5c919/attachment.png>