[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Input requested: RDS PDP WG Poll on Purpose - 13 December

[Gomes, Chuck]

Regarding the poll that is currently out for responses, please DO NOT assume that the options in item 1 assume users would be required to declare a purpose or identify or authenticate themselves or whether or not policy might apply additional criteria to determine or control access.



If you prefer, leave the options for item 1 blank, and if you would like the following choice, please copy and paste it in the input box for item 2:  "Thin data' about gTLD domain names should be accessible to all users anonymously and without declaration of purpose, with illegitimate uses expressly prohibited by policy."



Whether you like the design of the poll or not, I want to point out that it has already generated feedback that will be useful as we continue to deliberate on question 2.1.



Chuck



From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Phifer
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 2:42 PM
To: RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Input requested: RDS PDP WG Poll on Purpose - 13 December



Dear all,

To elaborate a bit more on this poll's goal -

Yesterday's WG call suggested a need to tease apart an extremely complex set of possibilities and permutations into smaller simpler pieces.

To do so, we tried to create a poll question that asked as narrowly as possible whether purpose should play a role in access to "thin data" while giving you an opportunity to elaborate on why or why not. If results suggest that purpose should apply in some way then the WG can further deliberate on how.

This is why the options listed for Q1 do not state (and were not intended to imply) anything about whether or not users would be required to declare a purpose or identify or authenticate themselves or whether or not policy might apply additional criteria to determine or control access. See also Q1 instructions given in the yellow box beneath the list of options.

In addition, the Q2 comment box can be used to identify any important assumptions that influenced your Q1 response, to propose alternatives or refinements for consideration during the WG's next call, and so on. Such comments may help us spot differences in interpretation that are important to make explicit in next-step deliberation.

If this approach of trying to answer one very narrow question first doesn't help deliberation move forward, we can try another approach.

Best, Lisa

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20161214/70df86de/attachment.html>