Chairs: Just want to follow-up on action items for WA2 arising from our 6-Jan call (link<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51414985>). First, I updated the inventory page<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51416471> to reflect the chairs’ proposed definition for Work Stream 1 (WS1). I realize this is still open to comment and discussion by the CCWG. I did not see other action items or email traffic that would otherwise affect our draft inventory<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51416471> at this time. Do you? Second, I realize the chairs are eager to see this list prioritized (WS1) and otherwise reduced to become more manageable. But as rapporteur for WA2, I am reluctant to unilaterally change WS1/2 preferences that were designated by CCWG participants. Nor am I assuming the rapporteur has any right to discard suggestions by others. Instead, I assume my rapporteur role as that of consolidating and organizing suggestions gathered from public comment and in CCWG discussions. Please provide guidance (via email or on our next call) as the appropriate role of work area rapporteurs in editing or discarding suggestions of CCWG participants. Regards, Steve — Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org<http://www.netchoice.org/> and http://blog.netchoice.org<http://blog.netchoice.org/> +1.202.420.7482