[gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Straw poll on number of options

[Peter Dernbach]

Dear Chris and All,

Apologies that I have not been able to attend the most recent conference
calls due to other pressing work commitments. I am new to ICANN Working
Groups, so am not as familiar with the process as many of you are. My
procedural question is this: how important is the date for delivering our
Initial Report?  It seems clear to me that our working group has not yet
reached a consensus position. I also believe that issuing an initial report
with multiple opinions may not be as helpful to the community in the policy
making process. Is there another option of providing an update saying that
the Working Group has not yet come to a consensus on the content of its
initial report, so the initial report will be delayed while we continue to
work on reaching consensus?

The question at hand is "am I in favor of having only one opinion in the
initial report?" In theory, I am, but if we need to issue an initial report
at this stage, I do not think we should include only one opinion as I do
not think that reflects the current state of the Working Group.

Best regards,
Peter


 <http://www.winklerpartners.com/>

  Peter J.Dernbach
譚璧德


Partner
合夥律師(外國法事務律師)
   *T* 886 (0)2 2311 2345 # 222
*F* 886 (0)2 2311 2688   www.winklerpartners.com
pdernbach at winklerpartners.com
------------------------------

NOTICE: This email and any attachments contain private, confidential and
privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient.
If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, copy or distribute
the contents and are requested to delete them and to notify the sender.

本電子郵件及其附件含有私有、機密、依法受特別保護之資料，僅供意定之收件人使用。若您並非所意定之收件人，即不得予以使用、重製或散布，並請刪除其內容，並通知寄件人。

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Dillon, Chris <c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk> wrote:

>  Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> During Thursday's call, we had a straw poll:
>
> *Are you in favor of having only one option in the initial report?*
>
>  As you know, in the versions of the draft initial report until now there
> have been two options (recommendations for and against mandatory
> transformation), but if it is possible to have only one, the report will
> likely have a stronger effect. Whatever the result of the report, the
> arguments for and against will remain in it; this poll only concerns the
> options.
>
>  Please send your vote to the list if you did not vote on Thursday. The
> options are: *Yes, No *and* Abstain*.
>
> *Please vote by 14:00 UTC on Thursday 27 November*. (Note that there is
> no meeting on that day; the next one is 4 December.)
>
>
>
> In summary
>
> - This is not a consensus call on the options.
>
> - This is to decide whether the initial report should have one set of
> recommendations or two sets of recommendations.
>
> - If a majority believes it should be only one set, the WG, at a later
> stage (probably during our next meeting, on 4 December) will decide which
> set it will be.
>
> - Please bear in mind that this is the initial report and following public
> comments on it we will be able to modify/amend/change/reverse our draft
> recommendations.
>
>
>
> Incidentally, I shall email soon asking for your comments on version 5 of
> the report and including the rest of mine.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Chris.
>
> --
>
> Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities,
> UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599)
> www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/attachments/20141127/d143b525/attachment.html>