[gnso-dow123] The text being discussed

[Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The comments received appeared to favour the rejection of Formulation 1 
by a ratio of about three to one.  However, a number of the comments 
from intellectual property rights holders' organisations received 
appeared to follow a similar structure and to adopt similar 
argumentation, suggesting a concerted effort to rally responses during 
the public comments period.  For example, the comment received from an 
individual (Raquel Alcantara, identifying the organisation only as 
'copyright industry') appeared to explicitly follow a suggested template 
of response, rather than considering and responding to the preliminary 
task force report itself. 
(http://forum.icann.org/lists/whois-comments/msg00011.html)

As ICANN seeks to improve the representation of different interests and 
groups in its policy processes, input from diverse and previously silent 
groups is welcome.  The fact alone of a concerted effort to provide 
input should not itself undermine the credibility or usefulness of the 
responses received.  However, for the purposes of fairly analysing the 
public comments received, it is not clear in this case that the quantity 
of comments received reflects the diversity of opinion. If, for example, 
privacy rights organisations had orchestrated responses from sister 
organisations around the world, these responses should be considered on 
their merits by task force members.