Since I'm one who spent a lot of hours on this topic in the last round, I feel compelled to say my 2 cents.
First, there is no successful contradiction to the fact that PICs came about as a tactical response, a tack on.
Second, there is no successful contradiction to the fact that notwithstanding the ICANN org noise that all PICS were contracted and thusly enforceable, showed no enthusiasm for enforcement.
Three, the PICs themselves have a fundamental weakness as they tend to envelop business plans removed from the actual DNS. Speaking as a corporate strategist, it is a fickle thing to enforce and one I personally think ICANN would be challenged to enforce.
Four, the anecdotal evidence is that a couple of outfits have implemented PICs that smoothly integrate into their business plans; think a few of the gTLDs that attracted GAC early warnings. I looked and could not find any contemporary information either from the Compliance side or from the outfits themselves that tell how things are working years on.
On the balance of facts and the weight of evidence, most who filed PICS know its a 'feel-good-add-a-compliant-tick mark-get-out-of-jail-card' thing and that alone. In fact I believed my first use of the label 'not worth a bucket of warm spit' was to record my estimate of their value to the global public interest.
Maybe we need to encourage PICs. And maybe the gTLD operators will, like those outfits cognizant of GAC early warnings, come up with some that converge seamlessly into their business plans. If there is a better mousetrap to sell then I'm in. However, given the facts and history, I would need to be persuaded this is worthy of another investment of volunteer time.
-Carlton
==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================