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

["Steve Metalitz" <metalitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I suggest that we work from Olof's revised version, circulated March 9,
and that the suggested changes proposed by me (
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/msg00845.html) and Kathy (
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/msg00846.html) be considered.  

I also suggest that the following statement be included in the report.  

The BC and IPC representatives preferred that all public comment
contributions  that are about the topic of a public comment process be
summarized in the report. The BC and IPC representatives further raised
a concern that omitting some comments will send the wrong message to
those who participated in the public comment process that their efforts
were not incorporated by the Task Force in its deliberations, nor made
appropriately visible to the gNSO Council for their deliberations.  This
runs the risk of discouraging public participation in the ICANN policy
development process.  (Obviously spam, and postings that are entirely
off topic can be excluded from the summary.)

Steve Metalitz  
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ross Rader
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:47 AM
Cc: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Attached! Preliminary tf Report Purpose Whois
and Whois con...

Thomas Keller wrote:
> In light of this I would very much like to urge the members of the TF 
> to stick with the last version staff produced. This part of the report

> is merely a summary of the comments made and shouldn't be valued above

> its very limited purpose of being a summary. Since staff produced this

> report in compliance with the ICANN bylaws any further discussion on 
> this subject seems like a waste of time of this TF. Let's move on.

As I keep mentioning, it is helpful if those that disagree provide
specifics related to their disagreement - often those things can be
fixed. Since that hasn't happened in this case, I fully agree with your
suggestion Tom. It is useless to respond to demands unless those demands
can be justified.

Let's move on with Maria's first version of the report that was
circulated on the 6th of March by Glen on this list.

-ross