Thank you Jen. We knew that this will not alter the prioritization and we knew that it will not stop the work. But as a matter of principle and because we were the only stakeholder which requested prioritization of due process which is quite alarming, we decided not to support prioritization of a “gap” that could potentially have grave human rights implications. Grateful for the language that was added and NCSG will very closely follow the associated domain abuse and other gaps analysis, issue reports and potentially PDPs. I will also ask to record our concern about the prioritization of this gap, but only the prioritization, not the full small team report, be noted during the Council meeting. While we will adhere to the consensus reached, we will also continue to formally record our dissent when warranted. Thanks again for leading this group successfully. Farzaneh On Sun, Aug 3, 2025 at 10:33 PM jen--- via gnso-dnsabuse-smallteam < gnso-dnsabuse-smallteam@icann.org> wrote:
Dear DNS Abuse Small Team,
Thank you to all for your thoughtful input on the draft Issue Report and accompanying motion.
We have now finalized the report and implemented the suggested refinements. Thank you Farzi and the NCSG for their clarification regarding the inclusion of the *Associated Domain Check* as a priority gap. Accordingly, we have updated the stakeholder matrix and removed this priority designation from the NCSG column, in line with the feedback received.
That said, we respectfully note that the *Associated Domain Check* gap continues to appear as a high-priority issue for several other SGs and ACs. As such, this does not alter the outcome of the overall recommendations in the report. The Small Team’s recommendation reflects a collective evaluation across the broader community, and this gap remains one of the most frequently cited areas for potential policy consideration.
Importantly, based on prior input from NCSG and as discussed during the last ST meeting, the report now includes reinforced language emphasizing that all identified gaps must be examined with due diligence and through a careful balancing of rights and responsibilities.
*“The ST further notes that all identified **issues** should be assessed through a balanced analysis that considers the rights and responsibilities of all stakeholders involved to ensure that any policy development appropriately reflects fairness, proportionality, and due process.” (p**p** 3** & 4**)*
It is also worth noting that, in accordance with GNSO procedures, any future PDP initiated from this report will be required to complete a Human Rights Impact Assessment Checklist.
Thank you again for your active engagement, collaboration, and commitment to our work on this important topic. Looking forward to our continued contributions as the Council takes the next steps.
Best,
Jen
_______________________________________________ gnso-dnsabuse-smallteam mailing list -- gnso-dnsabuse-smallteam@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-dnsabuse-smallteam-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.