[ALAC] Follow-up on the ALAC Advice to the Board regarding PICs

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Hello all,

as I've said, they're light edits for clarity.
As long as the edits to not change the intent or meaning of the
sentence, I don't believe a re-vote is needed. Typos & grammar fall in
this category.
Kind regards,

Olivier

On 13/11/2014 20:44, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> OK.
>
> I had thought that once the vote started, the draft being voted on was
> set in stone.
>
> The changes Olivier suggests are all reasonable. I'm pressed for time
> today but will try to do the changes.
>
> - Evan
>
>
> On 13 November 2014 14:34, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
> <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>> wrote:
>
>     Evan, I believe that all (or most) of the changes that Olivier is
>     suggesting are cosmetic and do not at all change the intent or
>     meaning of the statement. If I had more time, I probably would
>     have caught most last night. Please try to make these changes and
>     I will get it reported (and a formal note of explanation to the
>     ALAC) when I return in a few hours.
>
>     Alan
>
>     At 13/11/2014 01:57 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
>
>>     On 13 November 2014 11:28, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com
>>     <mailto:ocl at gih.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Dear Alan,
>>
>>         thank you for this. I realise that time is of the essence, so
>>         will be
>>         short in my comments:
>>
>>         1. This is a formal follow-up Advice from the ALAC.
>>
>>
>>
>>     ​Maybe this is hair-splitting, but it is more as background to
>>     existing advice -- caused by the Board's need for more
>>     information -- rather than new independent Advice.
>>
>>     ALAC has long had to deal with different classifications of what
>>     it votes on. As this document itself contains no recommended
>>     courses of action itself, I would not call it Advice.​
>>
>>
>>         As such, when
>>         mentioning names etc. it should be better if a certain level of
>>         formality is upheld. When citing names, please cite the full
>>         name:
>>         "The heightened protection measures announced by Fadi, at the
>>         start of
>>         ICANN51"
>>         -> The heightened protection measures announced by ICANN
>>         President and
>>         CEO Fadi Chehadé, at the start of ICANN51"
>>         ​
>>
>>
>>      
>>
>>         [...other generally-sensible edits ...]​
>>
>>      
>>
>>     ​Believe me, Olivier, given more time there is much that could
>>     have been refined, added, and maybe even taken out. Notably, more
>>     time would have enabled direct answers to the illogical Registry
>>     response that PICs can only be fixed through a PDP (as the PICs
>>     themselves were not created by a PDP).
>>
>>     But doing even a usable statement able to actually be effective
>>     has been a fight ​against time, which is the reason the voting
>>     period is so compressed. Similarly, consultation with the gTLD WG
>>     was also compressed (and was not helped when the email thread
>>     started by my urgently asking the WG to review the original draft
>>     was hijacked for an unrelated purpose :-P ).
>>
>>     The Board is **now** considering its response to our Advice from
>>     ICANN51. To say this "backgrounder" was done expediently is an
>>     understatement. In the time it would take to incorporate your
>>     edits (and others that would be considered), the document will
>>     have been rendered nearly useless by not getting to the Board in
>>     time. Your indulgence is appreciated.
>>
>>     ​OTOH, if there is anything FACTUALLY (rather than
>>     stylistically) wrong with the doc, that needs addressing.​
>>
>>
>>     ​- Evan​
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Evan Leibovitch
> Toronto Canada
>
>     Em: evan at telly dot org
>     Sk: evanleibovitch
>     Tw: el56
>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html