[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 25 July Meeting

[Lisa Phifer]

Greg,

As directed during today's call, the poll includes the specific key concepts supported in today's call and the alternative wordings for those key concepts proposed on-list after the call per the action item. 

The poll does not propose any additional key concepts for data elements not yet discussed by the WG. As Chuck noted in his reply earlier, we will get there, but we are just not there yet in this week's poll. That said, the poll does provide an option and comment box for you to suggest any other alternative you prefer for any key concept discussed in this week's call.

Regards 
Lisa

> On Jul 25, 2017, at 7:14 PM, Greg Aaron <gca at icginc.com> wrote:
> 
> I’m really surprised that this new poll doesn’t present an option that reflects current ICANN policy.   Current ICANN policy requires three means (email, postal, phone).  The options that Lisa presented in the last poll and then in the new one today limit to one or two required means.
>  
> 6. Proposed WG Agreement #30 
> In the 25 July call, both support and opposition were expressed for the following key concept, derived from last week's poll results:
> In addition to email address, data enabling one alternative method of contact must be collected and included in the RDS.
> The following alternative phrasing has also been proposed:
> Data enabling one or more alternative or preferred methods of contact may also be optionally collected and included in the RDS.
> Please indicate below whether you agree with either or neither phrasing of this key concept. To suggest an alternative phrasing for this key concept, use the comment box to do so and explain why.
> a) Agree: In addition to email address, data enabling one alternative method of contact must be collected and included in the RDS.
> b) Agree: Data enabling one or more alternative or preferred methods of contact may also be optionally collected and included in the RDS.
> c) Disagree with this key concept, regardless of phrasing
> d) Unsure, No Opinion, or Propose Alternative given in comment box below
>  
>  
> When I filled out the poll today I proposed the following alternative:
> “In addition to email address, data enabling AT LEAST ONE alternative method of contact must be collected and included in the RDS.”
>  
> Like I said, I’m surprised that this new poll doesn’t present an option that reflects current ICANN policy.   If you don’t present that as one of the choices, it won’t get support because it’s not in front of people. 
>  
> All best,
> --Greg
>  
>  
>  
> From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Phifer
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 8:19 PM
> To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 25 July Meeting
> Importance: High
>  
> Dear all,
>  
> In follow-up to this week’s WG meeting, all RDS PDP WG Members are encouraged to participate in the following poll:
>  
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ZF3VFJV
>  
> Responses should be submitted through the above URL. For offline reference, a PDF of poll questions can also be found at:
>  
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086734/Poll-from-25JulyCall.pdf
>  
> This poll will close at COB Saturday 29 July.  Poll results will be discussed in our 1 August WG meeting.
>  
> Please note that you must be a WG Member to participate in polls. If you are a WG Observer wishing to participate in polls, you must first contact gnso-secs at icann.org to upgrade to WG Member.
>  
> Regards,
> Lisa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170725/c7d4db49/attachment-0001.html>