![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/abb910660d58d9a1f7762b745c213799.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Hi, Thanks for the reminder. BTW, these should probably be mentioned on the GNSO Operating procedures page and on the GNSO council resources wiki page. While I have no excuse and should have remembered them since I was part of the team that made the recommendations, others might not recall it either. In re-reading this pdf I notice that it says:
Proposed implementation : The GNSO PDP Manual foresees that ‘Upon initiation of the PDP, a group formed at the direction of Council should be convened to draft the charter for the PDP Team’. Applying the suggested approach would not contravene the GNSO PDP Manual. As a result, should there be support from the GNSO Council to try out this approach, it may be instructive to do it for the next PDP as a “trial run”, and if over time the Council believes that this approach is helpful, it could be formalized in the GNSO PDP Manual as one of the other alternatives that could be explored for the development of a PDP WG Charter
I see that at least the IGO/INGO Curative Rights Protection for IGO/INGOs has pilot tested this approach. If this PDP process loops back and reissues the Preliminary issues report, it does appear possible to repeat this experiment even though this is a pre-existing PDP. BTW, I am sure I am missing it, but when did the council agree on this experiment occur. Looking through <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions> I don't see it. Neither do it see it mentioned in the minutes of 23 Jan. But with my track record today*, as I said, I am sure I am missing it and/or forgetting something. I guess this whole discussion is fodder for John's collection of issues for the informal group of GNSO & Board types that will discuss the way forward for this PDP. Thanks again, avri * (misidentifying which preliminary report included rights impact analyses and forgetting the charter approach experiment) On 02-Oct-14 09:49, Marika Konings wrote:
Hi Avri,
As part of the PDP Improvements (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/pdp-improvements-table-16jan14-en.pdf),
the Council agreed to 'Include draft Charter as standard element in
Preliminary and Final Issue Report' and evaluate after 6-12 months the impact / experience of doing so following which it could be decided whether the PDP Manual should be modified accordingly to add this as an alternative to forming a DT (which is a 'should' but not a 'must' at the moment).
Best regards,
Marika
On 02/10/14 15:41, "Avri Doria" <avri@acm.org> wrote:
Hi,
The correction of my recall convinced me to go back are re-read the manual:
I noticed:
Upon initiation of the PDP, a group formed at the direction of Council should be convened to draft the charter for the PDP Team.
Does this present problems in relation to including a charter in evan a final Issues report at this time?
Incidentally the impact analysis questions that concern me and that I believe need comment before the issuance of a final issue report relate to:
The following elements should be considered in the Issue Report: a) The proposed issue raised for consideration
This issue includes the rights impacts that need to be an explicit part of the PDP.
This is such a large and critical change moving forward, we need to make sure that the PDP starts on a solid basis. Lets not make the same mistakes that have been elsewhere of trying to start a large and critical process without adequate public comment.
Thanks
avri