RE: [gnso-dow123] Attached! Preliminary tf Report Purpose Whois and Whois con...

["Maria Farrell" <maria.farrell@xxxxxxxxx>]

All,
 
The criterion stated in the original public comments report was the only
criterion applied in the selection of comments. 
 
Regarding the issue of publication of all public comments, it may be useful
to recall the relevant section of the ICANN bylaws:
 
 b. At the end of the twenty (20) day period, the Staff Manager will be
responsible for reviewing the comments received and adding those deemed
appropriate for inclusion in the Staff Manager's reasonable discretion to
the Task Force Report or Initial Report (collectively, the "Final Report").
The Staff Manager shall not be obligated to include all comments made during
the comment period, including each comment made by any one individual or
organization. 
 
Clearly, objective criteria are required for selecting comments when there
are more comments than can be reasonably included in a report. Staff
explicitly applied an objective criterion in the original public comments
report.  If another objective criterion is to be applied, then it will be
helpful if it is communicated to us in a transparent way.  Bruce Tonkin's
message earlier today ("Purpose of public comments in GNSO") has been very
helpful in this regard. 
 
Maria
 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Steve Metalitz
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:32 AM
To: Ross Rader
Cc: Olof Nordling; gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Attached! Preliminary tf Report Purpose Whois and
Whois con...


Ross, that is my view.  I do not think that the criterion that comment
should not be summarized unless it contains an argument "that we haven't
heard within the TF and are not otherwise contained in the report" is very
useful, nor do I think it is the appropriate criterion for the staff to
apply.  Nor do I think it was the criterion the staff actually did apply in
choosing which comments to summarize.     
 
Steve

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx on behalf of Ross Rader
Sent: Mon 3/13/2006 1:41 PM
Cc: Olof Nordling; gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Attached! Preliminary tf Report Purpose Whois and
Whois con...



Steve - a second question;

You have changed the subsection titles to include the word "selected'.
Is it your view that the summary presented is not a complete summary of
the arguments presented in favor of, and against, each proposition? If
the summaries aren't exhaustive, it would be helpful point out precisely
which arguments weren't presented. Above all else, the summaries need to
paint a complete picture of the range of views and arguments submitted.
I don't agree with the request made by others to summarize each and
every comment without regard to their content, but to the extent that
commentors are *adding* to the discussion (i.e. bringing forward new
views and arguments for and against that we haven't heard within the TF
and are not otherwise contained in the report) then we should hear those
accurate summaries of those statements.

Steve Metalitz wrote:
> Thank you Olof for this constructive proposal.  Attached please find a
> few small edits which I believe would improve it. I am also concerned
> about the precedent set by failing to summarize many of the comments
> received.  I assume this will be a topic for discussion tomorrow. 
>
> Steve Metalitz
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Olof Nordling
> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 11:32 AM
> To: jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Paul Stahura'
> Cc: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; GNSO Secretariat
> Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Attached! Preliminary tf Report Purpose Whois
> and Whois con...
>
> Jordyn and all,
> While supporting the public comments report as originally drafted, I
> have also followed the ensuing discussion and I am keen to advance
> matters. In order to do this in a pragmatic way, I have prepared a
> slightly reedited and updated version. See attached.
> Best regards
> Olof
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Jordyn Buchanan
> Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:59 PM
> To: Paul Stahura
> Cc: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Attached! Preliminary tf Report Purpose Whois
> and Whois con...
>
> Hi all:
>
> Based on the feedback I've seen so far, most people (including
> Councilors) seem to prefer the call on Tuesday.
>
> So we will have our next call on Tuesday, March 14 at 9:30 AM EST.
>
> During the call we will discuss:
>
> 1) The final report on the purpose of Whois.  Any suggested edits to the
> report should be submitted no later than today.
>
> We will vote on the report (including which formulation you support)
> during the call.
>
> 2) The NCUC's procedural proposal.
>
> Jordyn