Re: [pdp-pcceg-feb06] Issues with current draft final report

[Liz Williams <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>]

Avri

Thank you for those helpful thoughts.

There are some very specific requirements which must be included in  
any TF report -- reference to the PDP TF guidelines shows that what  
is included in the draft, at the headline level, is already there.   
The organisation and flow can be improved with commentary from the  
group.

I would appreciate the input of others on the working document which  
has already been released.  The major new elements to be incorporated  
are the "straw poll" table which I released today -- that is a first  
cut and needs improvement to reflect the intentions of the group,  
particularly with respect to the difference between the TOR and the  
draft policy recommendations.  These two things do not map directly  
and need further explanation in the "straw poll" table.

A number of participants (Jon Nevett and Jeff Neuman in particular)  
proposed new text for recommendations which was mentioned on the call  
but not provided in the MP3 recording...could that be sent to me ASAP?

The major piece of work that needs completing is the shifting of  
"individual" views to confirmed constituency statements -- that can  
happen at the working session at the SP meeting.

Note that from the skeleton report the "levels of support" measure  
would show that none of the proposed recommendations have "strong"  
support as defined by the chair for the purposes of the 17 November  
call.  That can be remedied by referring back to the constituencies  
the views of individuals in time for the SP session.

I would expect the following next steps which I outlined in my email  
earlier today:

1.  confirmation of the straw poll table  -- come back to me directly  
with amendments

2.  improvements on the content and structure of the draft Task Force  
report -- come back to me with direct amendments and drafting changes

3.  completion of the preparations for SP -- I will send an agenda  
tomorrow for the Dec 4 meeting.

Liz


.....................................................

Liz Williams
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob




On 21 Nov 2006, at 18:06, Avri Doria wrote:

> hi,
>
> In reading through the current draft of the final report I am  
> concerned that its organization is problematic and that in its  
> current form it will make reaching closure on the final report much  
> more difficult then it needs to be.
>
> Some of the difficulties I see:
>
> - the attendance reports being so prominent has been seen as  
> punitive by some.  While the information is important in showing  
> details of the process it is more appropriate to an addendum then  
> to the front of the document.  I think the process should be  
> described and the fact that attendance was tracked included.  The  
> tracking tables should then me moved to an addendum.
>
> - much of the background discussion in Rapporteur's groups, while  
> important, contains statements that not all constituencies con  
> agree with as conclusions or main report content.  Trying to get  
> this language acceptable to all might take a very long time.
>
> - I find the way the consituency reports are scattered in and  
> between the Rapporteur groups to be confusing.  I think it should  
> be easy to go to the constituency chapter in the report and find  
> their comments on each ToR.
>
> - While the latest mailing on the Straw ballot is a good start, it  
> seems to be organized in terms of ToR instead of recommendations  
> within the ToR.  Or maybe I am just not reading it correctly.
>
> While the forthcoming draft of the final report cannot be released  
> as a final report until the TF has had a time to read and discuss  
> it as a complete document, perhaps  we can again follow the lead of  
> the PDP 05 group and release it as a working document that can be  
> distributed to constituencies and others for comment in SP.  This  
> would minimally fulfill the commitment to have something for the  
> community, the council and the board to take into consideration by SP.
>
> But, unfortunately, I think that the draft final report needs major  
> fixes before it can even be released as a working document.  I  
> suggest that the following is necessary:
>
> - The attendance tables need to be moved to end as addenda.
>
> - While the Rapporteur reports need to be included as addenda, they  
> should not be part of the body of the report. Instead, the brief  
> report sent by Maureen (she calls it a skeleton), with some updates  
> and corrections as discussed during the last calls should be put in  
> place of the cut and paste Rapporteur reports.  and the  
> Rapporteurreports should be included as addenda.
>
> - The constituency reports must, of course, remain in the report,  
> though they should not be mixed in with the Rapporteur content and  
> should be individually included as a section of the main body of  
> the report as seems to be the tradition with other task force reports.
>
> - While the straw poll table needs to be included as an addenda,  
> the updated policy recommendation section should include the level  
> of support - which can be listed as tentative until after the SP  
> meeting.
>
> In thinking about it, I think we still need to get full  
> constituency results (support, no support, abstain) for the straw  
> polls.  As part of the agenda for the next meeting, I would like to  
> ask the constituencies to review their constituencies' straw votes  
> and  fill in the blanks.
>
> Given some of our discussions I am not sure how this fits with the  
> other TF members views.  I do think we need to remove language from  
> the main part of the report that we cannot come to closure on.  I  
> also think we need to work toward closure on the report - including  
> a description of both points of agreement and points of  
> disagreement, as quickly as reasonable.  I think the last meeting  
> with its ordered progression through the recommendations was quite  
> productive and am only sorry I had to drop out before the end.
>
> In terms of the agenda for the Sao Paolo meeting I think it could  
> include:
> - review of the constituency positions on the recommendations
> - review of the revised working document - which Liz will post on  
> 27 Nov
> - determine what must be done before the working draft of the final  
> report is ready for vote and full release as the final report of  
> the TF.
>
>
> thanks
> a.