I was re-reading the issues report and was reminded of this Staff recommendation: "In relation to the desired outcomes stated by ALAC in its request, ICANN staff notes that while most, if not all, outcomes might be achieved by the recommendations identified by the ALAC, it would be helpful for all parties concerned to engage in a more fulsome dialogue on the extent and detailed nature of the concerns to determine whether these are shared desired outcomes and if so, how these could best be addressed in policy work going forward, including a more robust discussion of the merits and drawbacks of various solutions to address agreed concerns. The GNSO Council might consider such an activity, which could take the form of one or more public workshops at an upcoming ICANN meeting, for example, as a precursor for the launch of a PDP as it would help to define and focus the policy development process on one or more specific proposed changes. While this could also be explored by a working group following the launch of a PDP, staff recommends further fact finding first to figure out what policy options might exist, and then conduct a PDP to assess the impact of those policy options and confirm community support for a preferred policy choice." I don't recall that we discussed whether we should follow this advice or not. Alan, is there a reason why your motion initiates a PDP instead of the fact finding that the Staff suggests be done first? Tim