RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Final Draft report, Rodenbaugh edits
- To: "Jothan Frakes" <jfrakes@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Mike Rodenbaugh" <mxrodenbaugh@xxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Final Draft report, Rodenbaugh edits
- From: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:18:55 -0400
In the spirit of compromise and to remove the identified impediment to
further editing of Section 4.3, I write to request the deletion from
Section 4.7 (in the MR version)
of the following sentence:
Virtually all respondents made clear that they believe the negative
effects of domain tasting far outweigh the benefits, if any, and thus
believe the best possible solution is elimination of the AGP. (The
pertinent sentence of 1.2 will also require revision. I hope to have
something by our call today.)
[mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jothan Frakes
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 1:21 AM
To: Mike Rodenbaugh; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Final Draft report, Rodenbaugh edits
I am delivering, as I offered to the list, a replacement for
section 4.3 that contains the bracketed areas that are contested, and
includes a 5th use of the AGP, while adding contains some of the
methodology and statistical support from the registrars.
Please find it attached. It replaces 4.3 in its entirety as was
distributed by Olaf on Sunday reflects many edits suggested by BC or
IPC, but does leave much of the essence intact. Again, as I have
mentioned contested areas are left intact but are bracketed.
I strongly disagree with removal of ANY language, most notably
that which identifies the impacts from each of the proposed solutions
from 4.3, this is important because it keeps relevance for the reader
who is ultimately making their decisions and allows them to do so aware
of all impacts and facts, and that includes the significant business
disruption that could be experienced by registrars and the degradation
of service impact to registrants.
There were registrars that used this straw poll as a manner to
respond to the working group who in essence are being silenced by
redacting any parts of it.
The elimination of the AGP is bad for most every registrar, and
they are entitled to express it, or are at least entitled to express how
disruptive such an elimination would be to specific, non-tasting related
areas of use, and that is what would be silenced with these edits.
I also strongly disagree with simply burying the content of 4.3
somewhere in an annex.
In the interests of not showing any bias, I find it hard to
justify making edits to remove areas that identify specific impacts or
commentary about how potentially destructive the elimination of AGP
could be in a pragmatic manner while leaving the final summarization
intact within 4.6:
..." Virtually all respondents made clear that they believe the
negative effects of domain tasting far outweigh the benefits, if any,
and thus believe the best possible solution is elimination of the AGP".
If there can be a statement in summary for any section with such
powerful generalization and prejudice about one of the proposed
solutions, it looks like fair game to allow these to remain in 4.3, but
I could be missing something. As I mentioned in last week's call,
elimination of AGP is something that should be weighed in on by people
who work with it every day and understand its uses beyond those that
this ad-hoc group was formed to report on, so that the findings are
I am asking for the attached to be the final version contained
in the report, adapting any changes we discuss on the call in the
morning, and for it not to get buried in any annex.
Oversee Domain Services
515 S. Flower Street, Suite 4400
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Confidentiality Warning: This e-mail contains information
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If
the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee
or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, any
dissemination, publication or copying of this e-mail is strictly
prohibited. The sender does not accept any responsibility for any loss,
disruption or damage to your data or computer system that may occur
while using data contained in, or transmitted with, this e-mail. If you
have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by
return e-mail. Thank you and have a nice day. No lawyers were harmed in
the creation of this disclaimer.
[mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:23 PM
Subject: [gnso-dt-wg] Final Draft report, Rodenbaugh edits
Attached please find my redline of version 1.5. Many thanks to
Olof for his outstanding work compiling this report.
As to section 4.3, I appreciate all the input on this. I think
it makes most sense and is most fair to excerpt and edit the submission
in section 4.3, to keep it more factual and less opinionated,
particularly since it is very unclear what was asked, to whom, and who
responded how. Of course, the entire submission will be included as an
Annex. This is consistent with our treatment of all the other opinion
information, where we have attempted to summarize it factually and then
append the entire responses as an Annex.
For tomorrow's call, I intend to go through this redline and
resolve any outstanding issues. We will then circulate a proposed Final
Report shortly after the call, and allow any final comments via list
until 2pm Thursday, PDT. I will then finalize the report and submit it