[gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Draft Initial Report attached
Lars Hoffmann
lars.hoffmann at icann.org
Tue Sep 30 15:58:16 UTC 2014
Hi Amr, Emily, all
Thank your for your thoughts! And before I respond, please let me point out
that I have attached a first version of the Draft Initial Report.
Just a quick note clarifying my Œroadmap¹ from my original email and also
addressing the important points that have been raised.
Please note that this is a draft Initial Report. As such it is not yet ready
to go for public comment and it is not intended to go out before (nor
during) ICANN 51. The document is produced now so that WG members have a
substantial draft to present and discuss in LA. The Group will continue
discussing the draft on Thursday's call and in LA during its face-to-face
meeting. Potentially, further feedback from the community might come forward
and feed into further amendments following LA. Only then would it the
Initial Report be put out for public comment.
Because the Group is faced with a binary question, the idea was to provide
clearly to the community both sides of the argument that have been discussed
(for an against mandatory transformation) and also provide the two logical
recommendations that flow from these different sides of the arguments:
mandatory transformation; no mandatory transformation. This would be done to
help encourage community feedback during the public comment period that
follows the finalized Initial Report post ICANN51.
Also, the PDP Manual does not prescribe a mandatory formal consensus level
call be conducted for an Initial Report - though it is of course an option.
This is to allow for differences among WGs depending on each group¹s
deliberations to date, such that the WG and its coChairs could decide not
to determine consensus level at this stage, including on the basis that
community feedback is important for informing the Final Report and the
formal Consensus Call that will need to be done. In this way, relevant input
from the public comment period will be assessed and fed into the Final
Report that will only contain one set of recommendations, to be determined
after the formal Consensus Call takes place. At that point, Minority
Statement(s), if needed, can still be produced and attached to the Final
Report. You may be interested to know that this approach was also recently
followed for the IRTP-D and IGO-INGO PDP WGs.
In any case, the Draft Initial Report is an amalgamation of Chris¹ straw man
and Petter¹s modified version and so maybe a decision on which way to move
forward could be taken on Thursday when everybody had the chance to read
though the document? I would be able to amend the document very quickly
after Thursday¹s call - based on the way forwarded decided by the WG
membership.
I hope this clarifies the thinking that went into producing the Draft
Initial Report.
Best wishes,
Lars
From: Emily Taylor <emily.taylor at netistrar.com>
Date: Tuesday, 30 September 2014 17:33
To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org>
Cc: Lars HOFFMANN <lars.hoffmann at icann.org>,
"petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu" <petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu>, "Dillon,
Chris" <c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk>, "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org"
<gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Draft initial report
Dear all
I agree with Amr's point of view. Is there a particular reason why we need
to go back to Council at this point (I'm not particularly familiar with the
process)? I was surprised by the recent edits because I had thought that
the group was pretty comfortable about the position we were heading in. I
must have been wrong there, and it is useful to surface the issues within
the group and talk them through. I see this as a point where we need to
work harder within the working group before going out to public comment (if
I've understood the intent correctly) - not sure we're quite "ready for
primetime" as the saying goes.
Best
Emily
On 30 September 2014 15:05, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org> wrote:
> Hi Lars,
>
> Personally, I find this approach rather odd. The WG is the bottom of the
> bottom-up policy development process. It¹s supposed to make concrete
> recommendations that are clearly stated in the initial report (or a draft of
> this report) with a clear indication of the WG¹s consensus level with these
> recommendations. The WG shouldn't have two sets of conflicting
> recommendations, and ask others to decide which set they like better. That¹s
> what the public comment period is for. This also provides an opportunity for
> any members with a minority position to provide a minority statement, which
> should be attached to the draft initial report and equally accessible for
> community review.
>
> To send a draft with two completely conflicting set of recommendations will
> only serve to confuse the readers/audience on what the consensus of the WG
> members is, following months of dialogue on the advantages and disadvantages
> of mandatory transformation.
>
> At this time, I believe the prudent course of action would be to determine the
> consensus levels among the WG members for each of the two drafts (Chris¹
> latest draft and the one with the modifications made by Petter).
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> On Sep 30, 2014, at 11:05 AM, Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear Emily, dear all,
>>
>> First I would like to say that it is good to see some activity on the mailing
>> list and as the discussion on this important issue moves forward. I just
>> wanted to lay out the groups¹ envisaged progress from now until after LA to
>> provide a little clarity where as are:
>>
>> 1. Later today or early tomorrow we will send out a Draft Initial Report.
>> Please note: This report will reflect both sides of the argument one
>> supporting and one opposing mandatory transformation of contact information.
>> Consequently it will also contain two sets of recommendations, one
>> recommending mandatory transformation and one not recommending mandatory
>> transformation. Providing both sides of an argument and different sets of
>> recommendations in our Initial Reports will hopefully help focus community
>> feedback more effectively and propel forward the WG's discussion.
>>
>> 2. The Draft Initial Report, including both sides of the argument and both
>> sets of recommendations, will be presented to the GNSO during ICANN 51 in LA,
>> and form the basis of the discussion for the WG¹s face-to-face meeting.
>> Please note: the WG will point out explicitly that there are opposing views
>> among its members and that the WG would like to encourage feedback on both
>> sides of the argument.
>>
>> 3. Based on the feedback, amendments will be made, and an Initial Report
>> will be produced and put out for public comment after ICANN 51
>> Please note: Regardless of the discussion/feedback gathered in LA, the
>> Initial Report will contain both sides of the argument and both sets of
>> recommendations, one in favour and one opposing mandatory transformation, to
>> encourage informed feedback on both sides of the argument.
>>
>> 4. Based on the community feedback gathered during the public comment period,
>> the Group will then discuss the community submissions and hopefully be able
>> to come to a consensus on either side of the recommendations.
>> Please note: Any consensus decision will then be reflected in the WG's
>> recommendations put forward in it Final Report which is no prejudiced by
>> the wording/reasoning of the Initial Report.
>>
>> Based on this, I would like to ask the Group to wait until the Draft Initial
>> Report has been circulated to gather further input/feedback from their
>> constituencies/stakeholder group and/or the wider community.
>>
>> If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to get back to me
>> or Julie either on or off list.
>>
>> Many thanks and very best wishes,
>> Lars
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Emily Taylor <emily.taylor at netistrar.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, 30 September 2014 10:44
>> To: Lars HOFFMANN <lars.hoffmann at icann.org>
>> Cc: "petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu" <petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu>,
>> "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk>, "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org"
>> <gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Draft initial report
>>
>> Dear Petter
>>
>> Thank you for marking up and circulating your comments on the draft paper.
>>
>> I note that you have deleted the word "not" from draft recommendation #1,
>> which reverses its meaning. This would have the effect of making
>> transformation of contact data mandatory, which has not been the consensus in
>> the working group as far as I am aware.
>>
>> I'm also not sure of the basis for the proposed change "the main part of the
>> stakeholders" in favour of mandatory transformation. I thought the previous
>> text which acknowledged that "some" are in favour, was a fairer
>> representation of opinions on the working group.
>>
>> The recommendation #5 now imposes costs of transformation on registries and
>> registrars. Again, I do not see this as reflecting the consensus in group.
>>
>> You have also removed the important text (page 4, para 3, that the costs of
>> transformation are likely to outweigh the benefits. This is particularly
>> important as the paper has rehearsed the complexity of
>> transliteration/translation of proper names and address data.
>>
>> I will be circulating your draft to the Registrar stakeholder group for
>> comments, but wanted to give an immediate heads up that the changes proposed
>> in your version circulated on 29 September are controversial, unlikely to be
>> acceptable to industry colleagues, and are likely to upset the consensus in
>> the policy working group.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>>
>> Emily.
>>
>> On 30 September 2014 08:00, Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org> wrote:
>>> Dear Petter,
>>> Thank you very much for your amendments - very good to see some activity on
>>> the list. Alas, as you might recall, we are working on a Draft Initial
>>> Report that we thought to send out to the Group today I hope to reedit
>>> the document based on your submission as soon as possible, still, it might
>>> somewhat delay the Draft Report¹s completion and distribution for review.
>>> Many thanks and best wishes,
>>> Lars
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Petter Rindforth <petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu>
>>> Reply-To: "petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu" <petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu>
>>> Date: Monday, 29 September 2014 22:53
>>> To: "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk>
>>> Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Draft initial report
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> I have made some "minor" changes, based on the initial IPC comments (see
>>> enclosed).
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Petter
>>>
>>> --
>>> Petter Rindforth, LL M
>>>
>>> Fenix Legal KB
>>> Stureplan 4c, 4tr
>>> 114 35 Stockholm
>>> Sweden
>>> Fax: +46(0)8-4631010 <tel:%2B46%280%298-4631010>
>>> Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360
>>> E-mail: petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu
>>> www.fenixlegal.eu <http://www.fenixlegal.eu/>
>>>
>>>
>>> NOTICE
>>> This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to
>>> whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged
>>> information and attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not
>>> the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it
>>> or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and
>>> notify us by return e-mail.
>>> Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu <http://www.fenixlegal.eu/>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> 12 september 2014, Dillon, Chris <c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk> skrev:
>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> Just to confirm that it was decided to start work on turning the straw man
>>>> (latest version attached) into a draft initial report, the first version of
>>>> which, it is hoped, will be presented during our call on 25 Sept.
>>>>
>>>> In the meantime, please submit any suggestions or corrections to the list.
>>>> Speaking of corrections, note that there is rather a confusing typo in
>>>> paragraph 1 of Appendix B: registrar should read registrant.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Chris.
>>>> --
>>>> Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities,
>>>> UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599
>>>> <tel:%2B44%2020%207679%201599> (int 31599)
>>>> www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon
>>>> <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>
>>>>
>>>> From:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Nathalie
>>>> Peregrine
>>>> Sent: 11 September 2014 21:44
>>>> To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>> Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org
>>>> Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] MP3 Translation and Transliteration of
>>>> Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 11 September 2014
>>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of
>>>> Contact Information PDP Working Group call held on Thursday 11 September at
>>>> 1300 UTC at:
>>>> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140911-en.mp3
>>>>
>>>> On page:
>>>> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#sep
>>>> <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#sep>
>>>>
>>>> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO
>>>> Master Calendar page:
>>>> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/>
>>>>
>>>> Attendees:
>>>> Chris Dillon NCSG
>>>> Ubolthip Sethakaset Individual
>>>> Peter Dernbach- IPC
>>>> Pitinan Kooarmornpatana-GAC
>>>> Peter Green (Zhang Zuan)-NCUC
>>>> Justine Chew- Individual
>>>> Rudi Vansnick NPOC
>>>> Lindsay Hamilton Reid RrSG
>>>> Jennifer Chung RySG
>>>> Wen Zhai - NTAG
>>>>
>>>> Apologies:
>>>> Petter Rindforth IPC
>>>> Jim Galvin SSAC
>>>> Emily Taylor - RrSG
>>>>
>>>> ICANN staff:
>>>> Julie Hedlund
>>>> Lars Hoffmann
>>>> Amy Bivins
>>>> Glen de Saint Gery
>>>> Nathalie Peregrine
>>>>
>>>> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
>>>>
>>>> Wiki page:http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx <http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Nathalie
>>>> GNSO Secretariat
>>>>
>>>> Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 11 September 2014:
>>>> Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the Translation and
>>>> Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working group call on the 11th
>>>> September 2014
>>>> Jennifer Chung:Hello Nathalie and Julie!
>>>> Nathalie Peregrine:Hello Jennifer!
>>>> Jennifer Chung:It looks a bit thin on the numbers right now?
>>>> Chris Dillon:Hello all
>>>> Jennifer Chung:Hello Chris
>>>> Rudi Vansnick:hello everyone
>>>> Julie Hedlund:@Chris: I've made you a host so you can move the document
>>>> on the screen.
>>>> Chris Dillon:Thanks
>>>> Peter Dernbach:Hell all.
>>>> Peter Dernbach:Hello all.
>>>> Wen Zhai:Good evening~
>>>> Chris Dillon:Good afternoon!
>>>> Wen Zhai::)
>>>> Nathalie Peregrine:noted! for Emily Taylor
>>>> Justine Chew:@Chris: Yes, happy with your suggestion
>>>> Lindsay Hamilton-Reid:Apologies for being late.
>>>> Rudi Vansnick:are there any suggestions to add to the present document ?
>>>> Peter Dernbach:In Appendix B you refer to "registrars" but I think you
>>>> mean "registrants".
>>>> Peter Dernbach:"easier to contact registrars"
>>>> Rudi Vansnick:yes should be registrants in fact
>>>> Rudi Vansnick:end of paragraph 1
>>>> Peter Dernbach:and end of paragraph 2
>>>> Rudi Vansnick:could be both also !
>>>> Justine Chew:yes could be both
>>>> Justine Chew:@Rudi: +1
>>>> Justine Chew:Since we are making recommendations, perhaps mention it and
>>>> qualify if it is not within the WG scope?
>>>> Rudi Vansnick:thank you all
>>>> Jennifer Chung:Thank you Chris, thanks all.
>>>> Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks all
>>>> Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone!
>>>> Chris Dillon:Thank you.
>>>> Chris Dillon:We have some busy weeks coming up!
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Emily Taylor
>> MA(Cantab), MBA
>> Director
>>
>> Netistrar Limited
>> 661 Burton Road, Swadlincote, Derbyshire DD11 0DL | T: +44 1865 582811
>> <tel:%2B44%201865%20582811> | M: +44 7540 049322 <tel:%2B44%207540%20049322>
>> E: emily.taylor at netistrar.com | W: www.netistrar.com
>> <http://www.netistrar.com/>
>>
>> Registered office: Netistrar Limited, 661 Burton Road, Swadlincote,
>> Derbyshire DE11 0DL UK. Registered in England and Wales No. 08735583. VAT No.
>> 190062332
>
--
Emily Taylor
MA(Cantab), MBA
Director
Netistrar Limited
661 Burton Road, Swadlincote, Derbyshire DD11 0DL | T: +44 1865 582811 | M:
+44 7540 049322
E: emily.taylor at netistrar.com | W: www.netistrar.com
<http://www.netistrar.com>
Registered office: Netistrar Limited, 661 Burton Road, Swadlincote,
Derbyshire DE11 0DL UK. Registered in England and Wales No. 08735583. VAT
No. 190062332
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/attachments/20140930/eaf37eba/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Draft Initial Report Version1.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 699904 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/attachments/20140930/eaf37eba/DraftInitialReportVersion1.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5080 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/attachments/20140930/eaf37eba/smime.p7s>
More information about the Gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg
mailing list