Re: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] Consensus-candidate charter draft

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

hi Ray,

thanks for breaking the ice.  :-)

i agree with your idea -- good catch.  does this cause any heartburn for 
others?  

mikey


On Oct 3, 2012, at 9:35 AM, Ray Fassett <ray@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Mikey, while it seems all quiet on the western front, I thought I would go
> ahead and break the ice with this thought for you.  Under Mission and Scope,
> it says the following:
> 
> "The PDP Working Group is tasked to provide the GNSO Council with a policy
> recommendation regarding the use of 'thick' Whois by all gTLD Registries,
> both existing and future."
> 
> Under Objective and Goals it says:
> 
> "To develop, at a minimum, an Initial Report and a Final Report addressing
> whether there should be a requirement for 'thick' Whois for all gTLD
> Registries to be delivered to the GNSO Council, following the processes
> described in Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws and the GNSO PDP Manual."
> 
> Should the Objective and Goals language be altered to be optically
> consistent with the Mission and Scope?  For example:
> 
> To develop, at a minimum, an Initial Report and a Final Report regarding the
> use of 'thick' Whois by all gTLD Registries, both existing and future to be
> delivered to the GNSO Council, following the processes described in Annex A
> of the ICANN Bylaws and the GNSO PDP Manual.
> 
> Personally, I do not see much distinction between "Mission & Purpose" and
> "Objective & Goals".  If others feel same, my thinking is that the two
> should read reasonably consistent (one way or another) for less opportunity
> to potentially varied differences of interpretation later.
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 11:06 AM
> To: Gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx DT
> Subject: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] Consensus-candidate charter draft
> 
> hi all,
> 
> i'm attaching a new draft for you to review.  it would be absolutely
> terrific if we could beat this draft up on the list and arrive at consensus
> on our next (and hopefully final) call next Thursday.
> 
> i'm shipping it without the redlining because the redline history is getting
> pretty busy.  but it's all there if you'd like to review the changes in
> detail.
> 
> here's what's changing;
> 
> - i drove that last draft version of the "transition to authoritative"
> language in 
> 
> - i added a footnote to clarify what we mean by "domains they sponsor"
> 
> - i've wandered through the draft and tried to get the capitalization right
> on the words registrar and registry 
> 
> - i've summarily deleted a couple of Jeff's suggestions -- Jeff, there
> wasn't much appetite for them on the last call, so this is your chance to
> advocate/persuade if you feel really strongly (although i'll note that this
> is really your second chance since you had the opportunity to post to the
> list last week as well)
> 
> - i've restructured a few sentences to swing them into the active voice and
> made a few other (hopefully) cosmetic changes to the language.
> 
> let's try to really kick this draft hard so we can polish this off on the
> next call -- otherwise Marika tells me we'll miss the deadline for the
> Toronto agenda and i'll have to work off my schedule failure as the
> lowest-ranked roadie in her rock band.  ;-)
> 
> thanks,
> 
> mikey
> 
> 

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)