[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Pros and Cons of Three Initial Reports & Comment Periods in Phase 1 v. Two Initial Reports

[Gomes, Chuck]

In an effort to try to summarize the debate that occurred in our WG call last week, on the list since then and in leadership team discussions, I created the attached list of Pros and Cons of Three Initial Reports & Comment Periods in Phase 1 instead of two as contained in our current Work Plan.  As I think everyone knows, a suggestion was made to cover the 'big three' charter question areas (purpose, privacy, data elements) first and getting public feedback on those areas before considering the areas of accuracy and gated access; I then suggested that that could result in three Initial Reports for Phase 1.

I hope I included all the main pros and cons that have been communicated and that I accurately described them.  I apologize if that is not the case.  Regardless, it seems clear to me that there are good arguments on both sides and there does not appear to be consensus either way, so the leadership team will propose an approach that hopefully will address concerns on both sides.

The leadership team plans to distribute a revised approach for reaching consensus decisions prior to the WG call this week.

Chuck


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160620/c733452a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Pros and Cons of Three Comment Periods in Phase 1 v Two.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 17039 bytes
Desc: Pros and Cons of Three Comment Periods in Phase 1 v Two.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160620/c733452a/ProsandConsofThreeCommentPeriodsinPhase1vTwo.docx>