RE: [gnso-dow123] Final Task Force Report on Whois Services

["Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx>]

What exactly will we be voting on?  

Steve 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Maria Farrell
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 12:39 PM
To: 'Milton Mueller'; gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Final Task Force Report on Whois Services

Milton,

This may seem like a non-sequitur, but in the absence of any guidance
from
the Bylaws, I have to go with the previously stated view of the task
force
about the relative time allotted to the proposals. A clear decision was
made
to treat the two sets of proposals differently,no task force member
objected
then or since, and I reflected that decision in the structure of the
report.
I agree that this is an imperfect mechanism, but I do not expect that a
task
force straw poll on this issue would yield a different result. 

Unless the task force is likely to collectively change its approach on
this
within the next hours, then I do not believe that further delay would be
worthwhile. 

If I do not see on this list a majority of task force members who wish
to
change the report again, then I will instruct Glen to commence the Task
Force vote tomorrow morning, 0900 CET. 

As the three days alotted for voting would include non-working days
(i.e.
Thursday, Friday and Saturday), the vote will finish on Monday, 12 March
at
1700 CET. 

If, on the other hand, a majority of task force members do wish to
change
the report, I would suggest that the task force reconvene in conference
call
to decide how the report sections should be ordered. I will be happy to
facilitate such a call. 

All the best, Maria
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 10:54 PM
To: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Maria Farrell
Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Final Task Force Report on Whois Services

>>> "Maria Farrell" <maria.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> 3/6/2007 1:32 PM >>>
>FYI, below is the agreed Task Force summary of the call when the status

>of this proposal was discussed on 18 December, 2006.
>A distinction was made by the chair and agreed by the task force  about

>the different status of the OPoC/Special Circumstances proposals and 
>the proposal made by Avri/Milton/Wendy and by  Marilyn.

Maria, this is a complete non sequitur. We agreed "not to spend
significant
time discussing" our proposal on a specific teleconference
-- but we did discuss it. If the "special circumstances proposal" is
included in the main body of the report because we discussed it, then
the
others have to be included too. 

>From a fairness and tidyness standpoint, neither should be in the main
body of the report.