I do not wish to see any parts of WS1 moved to WS2. We have traction and need to push on. On Wednesday, 15 July 2015, Jordan Carter <jordan@internetnz.net.nz> wrote:
Hi all
While I have seen some general comments from a range of people about the need to keep WS1 as narrow as possible, I haven't seen any specific proposals for what should be deferred to WS2.
*It would be helpful to understand the thinking behind this desire for change if, rather than making general comments, people could specifically suggest:*
*- what part/s of the current WS1 proposal they would like to see transferred* *- why they would like to see that part/s transferred* *- the overall impact they see on the coherence of the WS1 proposal caused by such a transfer*
For myself, since we have adopted a minimalist approach from the start of the work, I don't have any parts I wish to see transferred. Further, I see substantial risks to the integrity of the proposal and its ability to deliver meaningful reform to ICANN's accountability if any of the current parts are deferred.
That said: new ideas always deserve consideration on their merits. So please treat me as able to be convinced by strong logic and arguments that the benefits of transferring something outweigh the risks.
cheers Jordan
-- Jordan Carter
Chief Executive *InternetNZ*
04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jordan@internetnz.net.nz');> Skype: jordancarter
*A better world through a better Internet *