[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Our decisions, deliberations, and recommendations (was Re: Article 29 Working Party to ICANN)

[Andrew Sullivan]

Dear colleagues,

On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 07:32:56PM -0200, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
> 
> Hopefully they will decide that before RDS PDP deliberations require that information.

I would say, "Hopefully not."  I would like instead for the WG to make
some decisions and some recommendations, and put bounds around those
decisions (such as, "This only works if ICANN puts its 'data HQ' in
one of [countries].")  Given our apparent enormous head start on the
topic as compared to attempting to "fix up" the current whois policy
to conform, it'd be nice if we finished first.

More generally, I noted later in the thread that some people started
talking about the _current_ whois policies and what ICANN can or must
do, and so on.  I think that is not our concern, and if people want to
debate it they should take it somewhere else.  Only this week on the
call, people were complaining about how the WG seems to make no
progress in between calls.  Yet I have not seen an effort to hammer
out the compromise about terms that seemed likely to derail us on
Tuesday, despite there being a poll out that contains at least two
versions of what I understood to be the problematic language.

If we focussed on getting agreement on some of the basics, perhaps we
_would_ get done before ICANN-the-corporation is forced to make
decisions that create new facts for us to cope with.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com