[council] Next Steps: IAG Report, and WHOIS Conflicts with local law

[Stephanie Perrin]

Thanks for this.  I see no mention of my motion, which basically 
confirmed my position (and that of NCSG, whose submission missed the 
deadline) that the policy was fundamentally flawed.  I recognize noone 
wants another PDP but Council could also take the position that the 
policy needs to be revisited, and request a charter.  Seems logical if 
it has never been used in a decade.  Anyway, I would submit that such a 
document should mention the fact that there were minority views in the 
IAG that the policy itself has flaws which demand a fix.

Stephanie Perrin


On 2016-10-07 12:19, James M. Bladel wrote:
>
> Councilors –
>
> Having now considered --and withdrawn-- two separate motions on this 
> topic, it is clear that we need to regroup, reassess, and consider our 
> path(s) forward.
>
> Per the discussion on our 30 SEP call, I would like to convene a group 
> of interested Councilors to kick off discussions and present options. 
> For context, please see the attached Overview document prepared by 
> Staff.  This summary is intended to provide backgrounds, and kick 
> start ideas for resolution, but by no means is it meant to serve as an 
> exhaustive list.
>
> I’m hopeful this group can work together to reconcile the diverse 
> opinions on this issue, and come back to Council one or more motions 
> that have sufficient support to pass.
>
> Thank you,
>
> J.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20161007/69b81f55/attachment.html>