Re: [council] An issue or not an issue - that is the question

[Mawaki Chango <ki_chango@xxxxxxxxx>]

Have we, documented, any cases where PDP was not initiated after
an issues report has been requested by the council and, well...,
issued?


--- Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  From my perspective, this level of detail is interesting, but
> doesn't 
> properly credit the real point of the issues report, which is
> to 
> identify the issues surrounding a specific policy question.
> Its my 
> opinion that Council should only proceed with the process of
> creating an 
> issues report if we believe that there are reasonable grounds
> that there 
> is a policy question that needs an answer, that the timing is
> right to 
> do so and that it would help the council better understand the
> what the 
> landscape looks like in order that it might consider whether
> or not a 
> full PDP is warranted.
> 
> I only voted in favor of the creation of the issues report on
> this 
> basis. Based on the facts that I have come to understand, I do
> not 
> believe that this specific issue merits a full PDP, but that
> it behooves 
> us to understand the entire picture before we fully commit or
> defer.
> 
> Unless the issues report raises substantive new facts that I
> haven't 
> considered, its not likely that I will vote in favor of moving
> ahead 
> with a PDP on this particular policy question.
> 
> Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > Philip,
> > 
> > I don't totally agree with you regarding the consideration
> of merits of
> > an issue when deciding whether to request an issues report. 
> You are
> > correct of course that the primary place for doing that is
> when we
> > decide whether to initiate a PDP, but if there is already
> established
> > work that indicates the merits of the issue are
> questionable, it is not
> > necessarily good use of ICANN staff resources to ask them to
> create an
> > issues report.  Regardless of how willing ICANN staff is to
> respond, the
> > reality of the matter is that their response sometimes means
> working
> > longer hours and/or delaying other tasks that has other
> fallout.
> > 
> > Chuck Gomes
> >  
> > "This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity to
> > which it is addressed, and may contain information that is
> privileged,
> > confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable
> law. Any
> > unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly
> prohibited. If
> > you have received this message in error, please notify
> sender
> > immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." 
> >  
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> >> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip
> Sheppard
> >> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 3:58 AM
> >> To: 'Council GNSO'
> >> Subject: [council] An issue or not an issue - that is the
> question
> >>
> >>
> >> I think it worthwhile reminding Council about the origin of
> 
> >> an issues report (versus agreeing to start a PDP).
> >> The issues report is intended to clarify that there is
> indeed 
> >> an issue.
> >> No more, no less.
> >> It maps out an issue in an unbiased way to then allow
> Council 
> >> to vote on its merits.
> >>
> >> The vote on whether to ask for an Issues Report should be a
> 
> >> collegiate action of Council meaning that:
> >> a) someone thinks there is an issue
> >> b) Council recognises there is an issue.
> >>
> >> The vote should NOT be based on Council's view of the
> merits 
> >> of any possible outcome or resources. These questions come
> later.
> >> The reasons to vote NO are:
> >> a) it is outside of the scope of the GNSO
> >> b) it is an issue best dealt with bilaterally by the
> parties concerned
> >> c) it is in scope but of trivial importance.
> >>
> >> The reasons to vote YES are:
> >> a) it is an issue and is in scope of the GNSO
> >> b) I hate all possible outcomes but recognise it is an
> issue 
> >> and in scope
> >> c) I like some possible outcomes and recognise it is an
> issue 
> >> and in scope.
> >>
> >>
> >> Philip
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > 
> 
>