Good suggestions Sam.

Chuck

From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Sam Lanfranco
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 8:38 AM
To: Andrew Sullivan; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] The overflowing list (was Re: A new and rather important document with respect to jurisdiction issues)

On July 15^th Andrew Sullivan posted with regard to additional documents:

“I don't object, but I'm wondering whether there is really anything new in most of the additional documents people are bringing.”.

While it is agreed that there is no cut off date for additional documents one simple practice that would make additions manageable is that
the contributor/poster offer a very short explanation of the relevance of the document. Possible points would include:

• Is this a new point to consider, or does it add weight to an existing point already being considered?
• Does it address a principle, a single or cluster of proposed data points, or a use case?
• Does it address the issue of what is within or outside the ICANN remit in this exercise?
• Does it reference an external factor that would impact on the public interest dimensions of a data decision?

Sam L. NPOC