RE: [dow2tf] Whois tf 2: Draft section 2.4
Thanks Kathy. I attach a revised version of my text which basically accepts your changes to the bullets (I have re-named them findings rather than conclusions, though I share your confusion about the terminology). Your proposed recommendation I cannot support. What country's law dictates to ICANN what it must do if it decides (which it has not decided) to "reevaluate and determine" "the purpose of the WHOIS database"? Regarding your four introductory paragraphs --- we have two options, it seems to me. We could provide links to the submissions and responses to questionnaires, and to the constituency statements, http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/tf2-survey/ and http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/dow2tf/msg00202.html respectively, so that the reader could explore for herself the basis for our finding that there was no consensus. This is what I have done in the attached draft. Alternatively, I could prepare a one-sided summary of the submissions that called for preserving and/or expanding the existing data elements, to supplement the one-sided summary of the opposing view that you have drafted. I think the first alternative is more efficient but if you feel strongly about it I have no problem pursuing the second alternative. Please let us know what you think. In this regard, if the second alternative is chosen, I think the reference to Buttarelli's presentation is out of place. While the Rome meeting agenda was saturated with public events relating to Whois, his remarks were apparently made in a private meeting, or at least one that was so poorly publicized that many people with a keen interest in the topic were not aware of the session until after it had occurred. In any case this cannot accurately be described as "the ICANN community in Rome heard calls." Of course it would be appropriate to retain the excerpt from the Art. 29 working party paper, if the second alternative way of proceeding were chosen. Steve ________________________________ From: KathrynKL@xxxxxxx [mailto:KathrynKL@xxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 11:18 PM To: Steve Metalitz; GNSO Secretariat; dow2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [dow2tf] Whois tf 2: Draft section 2.4 Attached please find some edits to Steve's section on collection of data (2.4/3.4). In my review of materials, I found a considerable discussion of collection of data submitted in constituency statements, our data gathering phase, and also the government submission that Team 1 was tasked to review. It seems appropriate to add it. Also, I am a bit confused about conclusions vs. findings vs. recommendations, so I rearranged things a bit in keeping with our other sections. Word doc attached. Hope AOL lets it come through nicely, Kathy TF2 participants, With apologies for tardiness here is a draft of section 2.4 of the findings (re: collection of data) in text form and attached as a Word document. Steve Metalitz Attachment:
Domain Names Whois TF 2 revised DRAFT collection of data findings sjm 052104.doc |