Outreach is very important, you're right. Where has everyone been that they are only just thinking about outreach now at the initial report stage? This group has been working for an AGE. Kiran Kiran Malancharuvil Internet Policy Counselor MarkMonitor 415-419-9138 (m) Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos. On Apr 27, 2015, at 3:08 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote: It is indeed very discouraging that there is so little interest outside ICANN insiders. However, a longer timeframe gives us time to do the outreach to busy individuals and organizations, and attempt to attract their interest. Posting on the ICANN website is not enough. Stephanie Perrin On 2015-04-28 6:22, Susan Kawaguchi wrote: Hi Kathy, I agree with you that more people outside of ICANN should provide input and review our report but as you know that is a hard thing to actually have occur. The EWG was composed of several people either on the fringe of the ICANN community or completely outside of it to start. Stephanie is the only one that truly dug in and got involved. We also reached out to many different groups for input as we were drafting our report and received very little in return. The IANA transition has brought more interest to ICANN than previously but I do not see an uptick in comments from those outside of ICANN on other issues. Not sure adding time to the comment period will gain much. Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Legal Dept. Phone - 650 485-6064 From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com<mailto:kathy@kathykleiman.com>> Date: Monday, April 27, 2015 at 1:43 PM To: "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Updated draft Initial Report - timelines Hi All, Do I understand correctly that we are putting out a 100+ page report on a complex subject for review by the ICANN Community - and world community - *before Buenos Aires*?? That seems awfully tight if we want substantive comments - and the outreach to participate -- that a WG presentation/discussion in Buenos Aires would encourage (and the web presence it would create). We (in the WG) have talked about these issues a lot - but have others outside our WG followed these them with so many other things in motion? In the Whois Review Team we heard a lot of complaints from individuals, organizations, data protection and law enforcement offices that ICANN's proceeding are difficult to follow and even more difficult to participate in -- in large part because the rapid comment timeframes are not conducive to global outreach or the timelines needed to encourage substantive and thoughtful comments (especially by government entities). We issued a recommendation that on Whois issues, in particular, we have to do more... WHOIS Review Team Final Report Recommendation 3 - Outreach ICANN should ensure that WHOIS policy issues are accompanied by cross-community outreach, including outreach to the communities outside of ICANN with a specific interest in the issues, and an ongoing program for consumer awareness. I think we should allow two months to respond -- at a minimum. Best, Kathy On 4/23/2015 6:31 PM, Mary Wong wrote: Dear WG members, Attached please find: (1) the updated draft Initial Report for our Working Group, incorporating all changes and updates as of our call this past Tuesday, 21 April and retaining all options/wording yet to be agreed on, marked up from the 29 January 2015 version; (2) a clean copy of that part of the Executive Summary that contains all the WG’s preliminary conclusions, open questions and majority/minority positions (note the markup is fairly messy, given that significant changes have been made to this part of the document); and (3) a clean copy of the illustrative Disclosure Framework for trademark and copyright-related requests (incorporated into the Initial Report as Annex E). All three documents have also been posted to the WG wiki, and are accessible at: https://community.icann.org/x/TYsQAw. We have tried our best to incorporate all the changes and updates to date, and have as a result made significant changes to the Executive Summary from the 29 January document. Other – consequent – changes are largely contained in Section 7, which as you know is the more detailed and contextual text explaining our deliberations and recommendations. Two new Annexes – one for the illustrative Disclosure Framework and the other for additional statements (if any) - have also been added. Most of the other changes to the 29 January version are therefore more of formatting, typo-correcting, and grammar-related ones. As always, please let us know if you spot any errors or omissions. We look forward to finalizing the draft with everyone on the WG call next week (28 April). Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg _______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg