[gnso-contro-wg] Controversial Names Subgroup report
I have attached rev 06 of the Controversial Names report. While I have done my best to try and capture the 'strong support' point of the sub-group, some comments came in at the end that were merged into the document without sub-group discussion.
The two primary recommendations that came in late were:
- a basic reorganization of the dispute resolution process for clarity with some content editing for achieving majority support.
- the addition of a requirement that
Any consensus or other formally supported position from an ICANN Advisory Committee or ICANN Supporting Organization must document the position of each member within that committee or organization (i.e., support, opposition, abstention) in compliance with both the spirit and letter of the ICANN bylaws regarding openness and transparency.
It is possible that sub-group members may want to add minority statements with regard to these changes if I have incorrectly perceived the level of support.