[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 24 January Meeting

[Andrew Sullivan]

Dear colleagues,

I did not manage to complete this questionnaire in time.  I also have
not listened to all the discussion from the other day, so you ought to
discount my views to the extent that discussion pertains.

I confess that I find the form baroque and confusing.  Nevertheless,
to the extent I understand it I think I understand the options, here
is what I believe:

On 2, I think that a, c, d, and f are good criteria; e is possible.  I
don't know what (b) would be that isn't (c) (i.e. I think if b does
not entail c then the contracts are wrong and need to be fixed).  I
haven't any idea what e is, really, so I can't comment.  So this
answer to q2 would be (c).

On 3, I nevertheless think that all of the purposes satisfy some
criterion I think ok, so I think they're all legit.  I would answer
3.a

Best regards,

A



On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 08:00:54AM -0700, Lisa Phifer wrote:
> 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/LQC2YJH
> 
>  
> 
> 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/74580038/Poll-from-24Januar
> y-Call.pdf
> 
>  
> 
> This poll will close at COB Saturday 27 January. 
> 
>  
> 
> 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
> 

> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com