[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] A slightly revised proposed approach for reviewing public comments

[Kathy Kleiman]

Hi Don, Steve, Graeme, Mary and all WG members,
I would like recommend that we take a slightly different approach. We 
received over ten thousand comments, many coming from those who do not 
ordinarily participate in the ICANN process. They wrote to us us not 
only in response to our specific questions, but also to share agreement 
(and disagreement) to our consensus positions/report proposals, and to 
explain why proxy/privacy registrations are important to them. There has 
been a huge outpouring particularly on the last issue.

While a few topics for cataloging these comments were presented on the 
call, with great respect, I do not think we have dealt with or cataloged 
all of the major issues and concerns raised by the comments yet. Before 
we leap forward to subteams and analysis, shouldn't we ask further, in 
writing, and with the whole of the WG participating -- have we gotten 
the topics right?  Have we created sufficient topics to allow us to 
catalog the broad range of information, concerns and comments shared 
with us by so many commenters?

I would like to request that we be able to take big breath, and a 
slightly (only slightly!) different approach.  In preparation for 
Tuesday's call, could we all skim the comments -- with our array of 
expertise, insight, knowledge of aspects of our commenter base -- to 
come up with topics that we think the WG should evaluate in tour 
review?  Perhaps if we can circulate the topics online, and then discuss 
them on Tuesday.

Then we discuss how these topics/this substance might be overlaid on the 
subteam process laid out below and shared for the first time on last 
week's call. We will then have both substance and process! And we will 
know that we have considered all of the major issues arising from these 
important comments.

If we go forward now without this evaluation, I fear we may be missing 
much of what the comments have to offer.

Best and tx,
Kathy


*From:* gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org 
<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> 
[mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Mary Wong
>
> *Sent:* 14 July 2015 23:50
> *To:* gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] A proposed approach for reviewing 
> public comments
>
> Dear WG members,
>
> Following from the WG call earlier today, the co-chairs and staff 
> after some consultation would like to propose the following approach 
> for your consideration:
>
> _1. Use of Sub Teams for Specific Topics_:
>
>   * Sub-teams comprising a few WG volunteers each can be formed to do
>     the initial review of public comments received on the three topics
>     suggested by Steve on the call, i.e. (1) Section 1.3.2 of the
>     Initial Report (on escalation of relay requests and the handling
>     of disclosure/publication requests from third parties other than
>     IP rights holders); (2) Section 1.3.3 (on the open question
>     regarding online financial transactions); and (3) Annex E (the
>     Illustrative Disclosure Framework).
>   * To assist the WG evaluate the usefulness of sub teams, a sub team
>     for Section 1.3.2 can be formed first and serve as a “test case”
>     for the exercise.
>   * As outlined on the call, a sub team will do a “first pass” through
>     a template, based on the Public Comment Review Tool, that staff
>     will populate with all the input received on that particular
>     issue. The sub team will report back to the full WG in a timely
>     fashion, including suggesting a WG response and/or proposed action
>     in relation to the comments received.
>   * Sub teams may elect to do their work via email and online tools
>     (e.g. Google Docs or a wiki page), with or without supplemental
>     conference calls. Any calls will be recorded and transcribed for
>     transparency purposes, and drafts and other documents prepared
>     using online tools will also be made available to the full WG. (Do
>     note, however, that depending on call scheduling and timing, staff
>     support may not be available for all requested calls if several
>     sub teams are used concurrently.)
>
> *PLEASE VOLUNTEER FOR SUB TEAM 1.3.2 IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN 
> ASSISTING WITH THIS INITIAL REVIEW. *Staff will endeavor to provide 
> the template tool for 1.3.2 to the sub team as soon as possible, 
> hopefully by Monday.
>
> _2. Full WG Review of Other Comments to Continue in Parallel_:
>
>   * Staff will “collapse” (per James’ suggestion on the call) all
>     those template responses received that were simply a Yes or No
>     answer to a question, without any further comment added – these
>     will be reflected in the Public Comment Review Tool accordingly,
>     as a single collective entry. The current Tool (covering
>     Preliminary Recommendations 1 through 9) will be updated in time
>     for the WG to begin this review on the next call.
>
> _3. Collated Information_:
>
>   * In addition to the updated spreadsheet just circulated by Graeme,
>     we can also send you archived mail files of the contributions
>     received to the public comment forum, should you or your group
>     wish to conduct searches through each comment yourselves.
>
> We hope the above will be helpful in facilitating good progress on the 
> work to be done in preparation for the Final Report.
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
>
> Mary Wong
>
> Senior Policy Director
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
>
> Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
>
> Email: mary.wong at icann.org <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Confidentiality Notice
> This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer. It is intended 
> exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. 
> This communication may contain information that is proprietary, 
> privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from 
> disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized 
> to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part 
> of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the 
> sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the message.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20150716/7d729a2c/attachment.html>