Can I ask why "spanning the dot" is to be referred to the full WG according to this document despite apparent agreement that it's a proposal that was previously considered and no new information has been provided? That doesn't seem consistent with the principles announced.


Rebecca Tushnet
Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School
703 593 6759

From: GNSO-RPMs-WG-SGA <gnso-rpms-wg-sga-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org>
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 1:53 PM
To: gnso-rpms-wg-sga@icann.org <gnso-rpms-wg-sga@icann.org>
Subject: [GNSO-RPMs-WG-SGA] Sub Group A: Public Comment Analysis Summary Document
 

Dear Sub Group A members,

 

As mentioned during the call, staff have been developing a public comment analysis document to succinctly encapsulate/summarize the Sub Group’s deliberations on the public comments. We hope this document can help Sub Group A present the outcome of its work for review/consideration by the full WG. Please see the document here with a brief introduction below: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10mftuhNy7YMgtCIu2ZRwsCleDgbP8AAAFz_jMHBFL70/edit?usp=sharing

 

 

The update of this document will be ongoing -- staff aim to update this document shortly after each meeting finishes and circulate it for Sub Group members’ review. You are welcome to provide input/feedback and point out any error/mischaracterization/missing content on list. To facilitate your review, staff can provide a brief presentation on this document during next week’s call.

 

Thank you for your time and review.

 

Best Regards,

Mary, Julie, Ariel