Re: [council] DRAFT GNSO Council teleconference agenda 14 April 2016 at 21:00 UTC

[Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Rubens,

I agree, and tried to make this point myself several times, including on 
Tuesday.

> On Apr 14, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@xxxxxx> wrote:

[SNIP]

> "To the extent it is possible to predict in advance what stakeholder groups 
> may be impacted by future policy development efforts, that would be very 
> helpful. It is probably more likely though to be able to do that after 
> specific policy issues are identified. Certainly, this seems like a very good 
> recommendation to be implemented in Issue Reports. It would make more sense 
> to commission an analysis that is specific to the policy development process, 
> rather than a wide-ranging analysis that may serve no purpose."

Indeed. I suspect that if the recommendation had been made by the independent 
examiner in a way similar to the one you put it, the recommendation would have 
been color-coded orange (work already underway) as opposed to red (do not 
implement). I say this with consideration to the work done by the Data and 
Metrics for Policy Development working group, as well as a number of 
WHOIS-related studies that have already informed and continue to inform GNSO 
PDPs.

Thanks.

Amr