Sarah and all, Your suggestion to have staff advise the number of 'for' and 'against' GAC advise is well-taken. Besides the fact that the report appears outright biased, it is anything but an analysis of what was being said in the public comments as evidenced by the BC submission which was largely overlooked. There was also - as I noted on our call today - no mention of conflicts of interest, which weigh heavily in such an analysis. I would encourage the BC to consider how we approach a response calling for a more neutral analysis with the accent on both 'neutral' and a real 'analysis' (as opposed to staff selected text) to frame an important document that is going to the NGBC for their review. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners <http://www.rnapartners.com> www.rnapartners.com From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Deutsch, Sarah B Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 12:48 To: Phil Corwin; bc-gnso@icann.org Subject: [bc-gnso] RE: ICANN Staff Report on Public Comments re: GAC Safeguard Advice Phil, Thanks for sharing. The staff report delves straight into the weeds without giving big picture data. It would be good to know how many commentators generally supported the GAC vs. raised concerns and who were the parties doing each? Sarah From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org <mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org> [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 9:24 PM To: bc-gnso@icann.org <mailto:bc-gnso@icann.org> Subject: [bc-gnso] ICANN Staff Report on Public Comments re: GAC Safeguard Advice http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-gac-safeguard-advice-23apr13/msg00134. html Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey