The answer in this instance is simple: The GNSO Council requested comments on the WHOIS Hypothesis studies on a very aggressive time schedule. It is very likely they will vote on the matter at their 16th October meeting, consequently, ALAC has been asked to get its comments in before that meeting. It is the case that Acs and Sos are asked for comments from other ICANN Bodies with very short timeframes on a not infrequent basis - sometimes with two weeks or even less' turnaround. This forces other communities to either respond within the timeframe provided, or to risk their opinion not being considered at all. On 03/10/2008 16:36, "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote: Cheryl and members of the ALAC: For years I have heard members of the community complaining about the short length of public comment periods. After considerable lobbying, ICANN finally agreed (via the Transparency and Accountability Frameworks document) that "the minimum time for a comment period will be 21 days". Today the ALAC has posted for comment a Statement on WHOIS Hypothesis Studies with only ONE WEEK allowed for public comments -- see https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?statement_on_whois_hypothesis_worki... Is there any particular reason why the ALAC can't adopt a public comment time frame at least as long as ICANN's? _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart