[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] The overflowing list (was Re: A new and rather important document with respect to jurisdiction issues)

[Kiran Malancharuvil]

I support Chuck's comments. When exploring new documents, we should pull out what's different. Volume doesn't equal right, but rather the careful application and relevance to the situation we are exploring. (Incidentally, this is why use cases are necessary.)

Thanks,

Kiran 

Kiran Malancharuvil 
Policy Counselor
MarkMonitor
415-419-9138 (m) 

Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos. 

> On Jul 15, 2016, at 7:31 AM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:
> 
> I want to Segway off of Andrew's thoughts.
> 
> We all recognize that there is a huge amount of duplication in the large list of resources we have identified so I suggest this:  as we identify new resources and even as we consider those that have already been identified, let's all try to focus on any new points that are added and call attention to those.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 8:10 AM
> To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] The overflowing list (was Re: A new and rather important document with respect to jurisdiction issues)
> 
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:32:13PM -0400, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>> May I suggest that we add it to our already overflowing list of 
>> important documents?
> 
> I don't object, but I'm wondering whether there is really anything new in most of the additional documents people are bringing.
> 
> It seems to me that we have a fundamental question we're going to have to answer.  I know that we've decided that now is not the time for deliberation, so I don't encourage discussion about this question.
> But I'm decreasingly convinced that more material is going to help us come to any decision about balancing the desire of some, on one side, to have a lot of personally identifying information about domain name registrants; and the desire of others to ensure that such personally identifying information is protected on privacy grounds.
> 
> We can probably continue to find additional examples of people insisting they need one or the other of these, but I do not really see any way that more evidence that someone really really wants one of them (with all the attendant arguments rehearsed) is going to help us come to a conclusion.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> A
> 
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg