These were references back to the 2015 report but I see now that they're confusing. I'll update. -----Original Message----- From: Bastiaan Goslings [mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 2:37 AM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Cc: Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Subsequent Procedures Response Framework Thanks a lot, Jonathan! The proposed approach definitely makes sense IMO. It is unclear to me though where the numbering in the Google doc comes from (’section’ column), e.g: Competition, Consumer Choice and Consumer Trust - Google doc refers to section 4.2.3 - In report it’s 2.3.1 Global Public Interest - Google doc refers to 4.3.9 - In report it’s 2.3.2. Etc. The report does not have a section 4, chapter 4 contains only a short ‘Background’ description, right? Anyway, I’m positive you’ll be able to enlighten me this evening (CET) during the call. Also when it comes to the list of subjects in the Google doc, I take it this is an initial attempt at determining what the potential areas of concern are for At-Large. thanks again, Bastiaan
On 25 Jul 2018, at 02:24, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote:
Folks, Here’s a little strawman for our discussion tomorrow. The idea here is to really think hard about what portions of the report would benefit from our response, what the overall thought on that response might be and then we would recruit a drafter to write that up. Hope it makes sense.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QR3CTgGjnVKDOTPQ6qEdksx9QAK76a j8E8F-fvkn9iM/edit?usp=sharing
Jonathan Zuck | Executive Director | Innovators Network jzuck@innovatorsnetwork.org | O 202.420.7497 | S jvzuck | <image001.png>
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg