Thanks for catching that. Will fix. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On April 14, 2019 1:44:48 PM EDT, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote: One of the items still says require... "The ALAC advises the Board require that the issue of Thick WHOIS issue be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 in light of the new legal opinion. Geographic Differentiation" Marita On 4/14/2019 3:22 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: Attached is the final version being voted on by the ALAC. It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" being changed back t "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. This was done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" way of rejected the advice ("we don't have that power"). Alan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

The errors caught by Marita and Sebastien are fixed in the attached version. Alan At 14/04/2019 04:23 PM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote: And if you fix that you may withdraw one of the two issues (the word). SeB Envoyé de mon iPhone Le 14 avr. 2019 à 20:42, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > a écrit : Thanks for catching that. Will fix. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On April 14, 2019 1:44:48 PM EDT, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: One of the items still says require... "The ALAC advises the Board require that the issue of Thick WHOIS issue be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 in light of the new legal opinion. Geographic Differentiation" Marita On 4/14/2019 3:22 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: Attached is the final version being voted on by the ALAC. It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" being changed back t "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. This was done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" way of rejected the advice ("we don't have that power"). Alan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

We will. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On April 14, 2019 8:11:45 PM EDT, Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Alan, The ideas expressed in the ALAC advice might also address some of the concerns of many Governments. Does ALAC formally share an advice of this nature with the GAC for a possible statement of support for one or all the topics of advice? Thank you. Sivasubramanian M On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 5:34 AM Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote: The errors caught by Marita and Sebastien are fixed in the attached version. Alan At 14/04/2019 04:23 PM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote: And if you fix that you may withdraw one of the two issues (the word). SeB Envoyé de mon iPhone Le 14 avr. 2019 à 20:42, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > a écrit : Thanks for catching that. Will fix. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On April 14, 2019 1:44:48 PM EDT, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net<mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: One of the items still says require... "The ALAC advises the Board require that the issue of Thick WHOIS issue be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 in light of the new legal opinion. Geographic Differentiation" Marita On 4/14/2019 3:22 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: Attached is the final version being voted on by the ALAC. It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" being changed back t "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. This was done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" way of rejected the advice ("we don't have that power"). Alan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

Thanks for this - while I personally cannot support the ratification of the draft advice with a ‘yes’, it does look a lot better than earlier versions. For now my intention is to ‘abstain’. In terms of wording/grammar: - On page 2, 'At the time the report was issued, there was also an outstanding question to the EPDP legal counsel whether ICANN’s presence in the EU imply that the GDPR apply ALL personal data regardless of location’ (et; ) I think it should be ‘implies’ instead of ‘imply’, ‘applies’ in stead of ‘apply’, and there needs to be a ’to’ after the ‘applies’. - On page 3, with regard to the advice itself, 'The ALAC advises the Board to request that the issue of legal/natural differentiation be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 explicitly considering the competing needs of those using the data for cyber-security and other legitimate purposes.' From the sentence it is not clear (to me) what the ‘competing’ refers to. - On page 4, part of the concluding remarks, 'The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not received sufficient full discussion’. ‘Received sufficient full discussion’ sounds strange to me. Maybe change into ‘The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not been sufficiently discussed’ ? Anyway, thanks again, and with regards Bastiaan *** Please note that this communication is confidential, legally privileged, and subject to a disclaimer: https://www.ams-ix.net/ams/email-disclaimer ***

On 15 Apr 2019, at 08:03, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

The errors caught by Marita and Sebastien are fixed in the attached version.

Alan

At 14/04/2019 04:23 PM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote:

...

And if you fix that you may withdraw one of the two issues (the word). SeB

Envoyé de mon iPhone

Le 14 avr. 2019 à 20:42, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca > a écrit :

...

Thanks for catching that. Will fix. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.

On April 14, 2019 1:44:48 PM EDT, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:

One of the items still says require...

"The ALAC advises the Board require that the issue of Thick WHOIS issue be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 in light of the new legal opinion. Geographic Differentiation"

Marita On 4/14/2019 3:22 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:

...

Attached is the final version being voted on by the ALAC.

It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" being changed

back t "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. This was

done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not

understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" way of

rejected the advice ("we don't have that power").

Alan

_______________________________________________

CPWG mailing list

CPWG@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________

GTLD-WG mailing list

GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org

https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL:

https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <Advice-DRAFT-v06-clean.pdf><Advice-DRAFT-v06-redline.pdf>_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

---

registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

I have a major issue with that last sentence. The tone of it basically goes straight back to the "require" language. We are saying that the decisions made have not been fully informed -- well, after all those hours of consideration and all the money spent, more information is probably not the problem. Although much of this statement does hinge around "information" -- new legal, studies, etc.-- I don't think it is necessary to throw in a final swat at the GNSO. It really won't help matters or get anyone further ahead. Marita On 4/15/2019 10:01 AM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote:

Other questions Not sure about this GDPR, in rough terms, only applies to entities within the European Economic Area (EEA) and to entities outside of the targeting individuals resident within the EU. Maybe GDPR, in rough terms, only applies to entities within the European Economic Area (EEA) and to entities outside THAT ARE (of the) targeting individuals resident within the EU. ?????

And 3 that?? Last sentence *But it is critical that that, if the Board believes, as the ALAC does, that the EPDP decisions must take all applicable issues into consideration and make fully informed decisions, the Board needs to ensure that this is fully understood by the GNSO and EPDP. * * * *Thanks* *SeB*

...

Le 15 avr. 2019 à 08:19, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net <mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>> a écrit :

Thanks for this - while I personally cannot support the ratification of the draft advice with a ‘yes’, it does look a lot better than earlier versions. For now my intention is to ‘abstain’.

In terms of wording/grammar:

- On page 2, 'At the time the report was issued, there was also an outstanding question to the EPDP legal counsel whether ICANN’s presence in the EU imply that the GDPR apply ALL personal data regardless of location’ (et; )

I think it should be ‘implies’ instead of ‘imply’, ‘applies’ in stead of ‘apply’, and there needs to be a ’to’ after the ‘applies’.

- On page 3, with regard to the advice itself, 'The ALAC advises the Board to request that the issue of legal/natural differentiation be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 explicitly considering the competing needs of those using the data for cyber-security and other legitimate purposes.'

From the sentence it is not clear (to me) what the ‘competing’ refers to.

- On page 4, part of the concluding remarks, 'The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not received sufficient full discussion’.

‘Received sufficient full discussion’ sounds strange to me. Maybe change into ‘The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not been sufficiently discussed’ ?

Anyway, thanks again, and with regards Bastiaan

***  Please note that this communication is confidential, legally privileged, and subject to a disclaimer: https://www.ams-ix.net/ams/email-disclaimer  ***

...

On 15 Apr 2019, at 08:03, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote:

The errors caught by Marita and Sebastien are fixed in the attached version.

Alan

At 14/04/2019 04:23 PM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote:

...

And if you fix that you may withdraw one of the two issues (the word). SeB

Envoyé de mon iPhone

Le 14 avr. 2019 à  20:42, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > a écrit :

...

Thanks for catching that. Will fix. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.

On April 14, 2019 1:44:48 PM EDT, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote:

One of the items still says require...

"The ALAC advises the Board require that the issue of Thick WHOIS issue be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 in light of the new legal opinion. Geographic Differentiation"

Marita On 4/14/2019 3:22 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:

...

Attached is the final version being voted on by the ALAC.

It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" being changed

back t "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. This was

done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not

understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" way of

rejected the advice ("we don't have that power").

Alan

_______________________________________________

CPWG mailing list

CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________

GTLD-WG mailing list

GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org

https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL:

https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <Advice-DRAFT-v06-clean.pdf><Advice-DRAFT-v06-redline.pdf>_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

---

registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

Well, things like this are more likely to provoke backlash than cooperation, IMHO. Let it be known that I argued against it. Marita On 4/15/2019 5:48 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:

I added that on specific advice that since we are not saying "require" we make it clear that there is a belief that if the board does not make a strong statement, it will not happen.

I completely agree that given the time, effort and resources, we should not be at this place now. But we are (in the views of those who have sat through all those hours).

Alan

At 15/04/2019 04:26 AM, Marita Moll wrote:

...

I have a major issue with that last sentence. The tone of it basically goes straight back to the "require" language. We are saying that the decisions made have not been fully informed -- well, after all those hours of consideration and all the money spent, more information is probably not the problem.

Although much of this statement does hinge around "information" -- new legal, studies, etc.-- I don't think it is necessary to throw in a final swat at the GNSO. It really won't help matters or get anyone further ahead.

Marita On 4/15/2019 10:01 AM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote:

...

Other questions Not sure about this GDPR, in rough terms, only applies to entities within the European Economic Area (EEA) and to entities outside of the targeting individuals resident within the EU. Maybe GDPR, in rough terms, only applies to entities within the European Economic Area (EEA) and to entities outside THAT ARE (of the) targeting individuals resident within the EU. ?????

And 3 that?? Last sentence *But it is critical that that, if the Board believes, as the ALAC does, that the EPDP decisions must take all applicable issues into consideration and make fully informed decisions, the Board needs to ensure that this is fully understood by the GNSO and EPDP.

Thanks SeB *

...

Le 15 avr. 2019 à 08:19, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net <mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>> a écrit :

Thanks for this - while I personally cannot support the ratification of the draft advice with a ‘yes’, it does look a lot better than earlier versions. For now my intention is to ‘abstain’.

In terms of wording/grammar:

- On page 2, 'At the time the report was issued, there was also an outstanding question to the EPDP legal counsel whether ICANN’s presence in the EU imply that the GDPR apply ALL personal data regardless of location’ (et; )

I think it should be ‘implies’ instead of ‘imply’, ‘applies’ in stead of ‘apply’, and there needs to be a ’to’ after the ‘applies’.

- On page 3, with regard to the advice itself, 'The ALAC advises the Board to request that the issue of legal/natural differentiation be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 explicitly considering the competing needs of those using the data for cyber-security and other legitimate purposes.'

From the sentence it is not clear (to me) what the ‘competing’ refers to.

- On page 4, part of the concluding remarks, 'The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not received sufficient full discussion’.

‘Received sufficient full discussion’ sounds strange to me. Maybe change into ‘The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not been sufficiently discussed’ ?

Anyway, thanks again, and with regards Bastiaan

***  Please note that this communication is confidential, legally privileged, and subject to a disclaimer: https://www.ams-ix.net/ams/email-disclaimer ***

...

On 15 Apr 2019, at 08:03, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > wrote:

The errors caught by Marita and Sebastien are fixed in the attached version.

Alan

At 14/04/2019 04:23 PM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote:

...

And if you fix that you may withdraw one of the two issues (the word). SeB

Envoyé de mon iPhone

Le 14 avr. 2019 à 20:42, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > a écrit :

> Thanks for catching that. Will fix. Alan > -- > Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. > > On April 14, 2019 1:44:48 PM EDT, Marita Moll > <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote: > > One of the items still says require... > > "The ALAC advises the Board require that the issue of Thick > WHOIS issue be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 in light of the > new legal opinion. > Geographic Differentiation" > > Marita > On 4/14/2019 3:22 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >> >> Attached is the final version being voted on by the ALAC. >> >> >> >> It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" >> being changed >> >> >> back t "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. >> This was >> >> >> done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not >> >> >> understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" >> way of >> >> >> rejected the advice ("we don't have that power"). >> >> >> >> Alan >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> CPWG mailing list >> >> >> CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> >> >> >> >> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> GTLD-WG mailing list >> >> >> >> GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org >> <mailto:GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg >> >> >> >> >> Working Group direct URL: >> >> >> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs > > _______________________________________________ > CPWG mailing list > CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <Advice-DRAFT-v06-clean.pdf><Advice-DRAFT-v06-redline.pdf>_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

---

registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

At 15/04/2019 02:19 AM, Bastiaan Goslings wrote:

Thanks for this - while I personally cannot support the ratification of the draft advice with a ‘yes’, it does look a lot better than earlier versions. For now my intention is to ‘abstain’.

That's fine.

In terms of wording/grammar:

- On page 2, 'At the time the report was issued, there was also an outstanding question to the EPDP legal counsel whether ICANN’s presence in the EU imply that the GDPR apply ALL personal data regardless of location’ (et; )

I think it should be ‘implies’ instead of ‘imply’, ‘applies’ in stead of ‘apply’, and there needs to be a ’to’ after the ‘applies’.

Thanks. Fixed.

- On page 3, with regard to the advice itself, 'The ALAC advises the Board to request that the issue of legal/natural differentiation be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 explicitly considering the competing needs of those using the data for cyber-security and other legitimate purposes.'

From the sentence it is not clear (to me) what the ‘competing’ refers to.

It is competing against the issues of cheap, easy, risk-free implelemtation for contracted parties. I have now added those words in the statement above about "balancing". Good catch.

- On page 4, part of the concluding remarks, 'The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not received sufficient full discussion’.

‘Received sufficient full discussion’ sounds strange to me. Maybe change into ‘The ALAC believes that the issues being raised here have not been sufficiently discussed’ ?

FULL is the critical word here. There HAS been lots of discussion, but not all of the issues entered into the outcome. When SSAC, for instance, raised the issue of considering the needs of those using data, it was discarded as an issue for access, but before we get to access, there needs to be a determination of what data needs to be redacted in the first place. Although there are increasing reports on the impact of the Temp Spec redaction, some were presented to the group but never discussed.

Anyway, thanks again, and with regards Bastiaan

And thanks to you! Alan

*** Please note that this communication is confidential, legally privileged, and subject to a disclaimer: https://www.ams-ix.net/ams/email-disclaimer ***

...

On 15 Apr 2019, at 08:03, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

The errors caught by Marita and Sebastien are fixed in the attached version.

Alan

At 14/04/2019 04:23 PM, Sebastien Bachollet wrote:

...

And if you fix that you may withdraw one of the two issues (the word). SeB

Envoyé de mon iPhone

Le 14 avr. 2019 à 20:42, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca > a écrit :

...

Thanks for catching that. Will fix. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.

On April 14, 2019 1:44:48 PM EDT, Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:

One of the items still says require...

"The ALAC advises the Board require that the issue of Thick WHOIS issue be discussed during the EPDP Phase 2 in light of the new legal opinion. Geographic Differentiation"

Marita On 4/14/2019 3:22 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:

...

Attached is the final version being voted on by the ALAC.

It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" being changed

back t "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. This was

done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not

understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" way of

rejected the advice ("we don't have that power").

Alan

_______________________________________________

CPWG mailing list

CPWG@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________

GTLD-WG mailing list

GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org

https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg

Working Group direct URL:

https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs

_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

<Advice-DRAFT-v06-clean.pdf><Advice-DRAFT-v06-redline.pdf>_______________________________________________

...

CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

Well, Evan -- I would say that, since we don't have much power, we need to keep all avenues of possible alliances open. That means, no gratuitous swiping at any group. Marita On 4/15/2019 7:13 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 09:23, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote:

It is largely unchanged with the exception of "require" being changed back to "request" and an explanatory paragraph at the end. This was done after consultation to ensure that we were not perceived as not understanding Board restrictions and to not give an "easy" way of rejected the advice ("we don't have that power").

Sigh. We really haven't learned anything, even after decades of experience.

The Board will reject ALAC advice that doesn't align with what it's going to do anyway, as it always does and has done. Why do we care if their rejection is really easy or slightly less easy? Do the consequences change whether the answer is "cannot" rather than "will not"?

Since we're anticipating responses .... if we said "require" and the Board truly agreed with our sentiment, it could respond "we're not able to demand it but we'll do what we can to ensure this important issue is addressed". Instead, we've toned down the statement before it even gets to that point.

Do we feel strongly that Thick WHOIS is addressed (you must do this in the interest of our constituency) or not (pretty please, we'll go away silently if you say no and forget we even asked)?

Maybe the problem is mine alone. I should stop being surprised at ALAC's capacity for self-debasement.

- Evan

_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg