The next  Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 14th January 2014 at 1500 UTC (07:00 PST, 10:00 EST, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET).

For other places see:


Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled:


  1. Roll Call/Update to SOIs
  2. Finalization of SO/AC invitation letters and SG/C input template
  3. Discussion of Work Plan/Mind Map (see latest version below)
  4. Discussion of Grouping of Charter Questions (see latest version below)
  5. Next steps & next meeting

For review:

MP3 recording:




Adobe Connect Chat Transcript:

  Marika Konings:Welcome to the PPSAI Meeting of 14 January 2014

  Graeme Bunton:good morning

  Volker Greimann:Morning

  Mary Wong:Hello and welcome!

  Tobias Sattler:Hi

  Carlton Samuels:Howdy all

  Kathy K:Hi All!

  John Horton:Good morning.

  Justin Macy:Good morning

  Maria Farrell:Hi everyone

  Marie-laure Lemineur:Good morning

  Holly Raiche:Good morning

  Michele Neylon:I'm here sort of

  Michele Neylon:but not really

  Don Blumenthal:My audio just dropped. I'll get it fixed ASAP or call in

  Graeme Bunton:thanks Mary

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Gema Campillos has joined the call

  Don Blumenthal:I'm back

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Amr Elsadr has joined the call

  Graeme Bunton:Sound fine Don

  Amr Elsadr:Sorry I'm late. Dialling in now.

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Paul McGrady sends his apology for today's call

  Nathalie  Peregrine:phil Marano has joined the AC room

  Nathalie  Peregrine:David Heasley has joined the AC room

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Stephanie Perrin has joined the AC room

  Carlton Samuels:Kathy's observations re the need for definitions to ensure good qualified responses are impatient of debate. Can we all agree that a) definitions are essential to objective  b) The select list of definitions should be included in the letter c) we accept those that are already defined authoritatively and leave any new ones to consensus agreement

  Marie-laure Lemineur:@carlton +1

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Val Sherman is on the audio bridge

  Mary Wong:If it will help, this is the GNSO Council's resolution approving the WG Charter:

  Tim Ruiz:Agree with Carlton.

  Mary Wong:Extract from the resolution: "The GNSO Council has reviewed the issues raised in the ICANN staff paper as well as a draft Working Group Charter incorporating those issues and others identified by the GNSO community as suitable for further consideration by the PDP Working Group ..."

  Phil Marano:@Marika +1

  Holly Raiche:But I think the point is getting the best feedback and if we can improve feedback because the questions are better, why not!

  Kathy K:Good points, Amr

  Mary Wong:@Holly, would it help to retain the questions as they are but organize them by an agreed grouping so we can get them to the SO/AC/SG/Cs soonest? They have 35 days to respond after that, which puts the WG into late Feb to even begin review of the input.

  Holly Raiche:@ Mary - even just rearraing them, grouping the same issues together, and adding definitions would improve the feedback

  Carlton Samuels:With respect to At-Large input from the edges and given the nature of our all-volunteer constituency, we know this for sure: 1) More definitions is better for understanding  2) Grouping the questions help them to contextualize the subject matter 3) Context helps them correlate with established At-Large positions.

  Don Blumenthal:We'll cut the queue after Kathy.

  John Horton:+1 on Tim's comments.

  Maria Farrell:I'm at a loss to understand 1) why edits were sought when apparently timing precluded them from being actioned and 2) how we think unbalanced questions are going to lead to balanced answers.

  Carlton Samuels:@Maria: Me too!  And if the objective is good results/qualified responses, why not get it right the first time

  Maria Farrell:amen, Carlton.

  Roy Balleste:Is our deadline June?

  Maria Farrell:deadline is when the current raa expires

  Don Blumenthal:The EWG deadline is June

  Don Blumenthal:I believe.

  Holly Raiche:@ Mary - even those changes would help

  Mary Wong:@Kathy, yes - not really a definition but a description, from the Terms of Reference for the proposed GNSO study on Relay/Reveal.

  Kathy K:we won't "fire," Don :-)

  Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: This IS the issue. The questions run across documents! We are strained as is to get input from At-Large.  The possibility of input increases when we are as clear on intent as is possible.

  Graeme Bunton:woo!

  Kathy K:@Carlton - agreed!

  Kathy K:@Carlton - what changes would you like to see?

  Tim Ruiz:BTW, from what I can see from the participants here, they will all be involved if not instrumental in developing the responses for their SO/AC SG or constituency.

  Kathy K:Can someone clarify what these questions will be used for?  the grouping ones?

  Marika Konings:@Kathy - it may assist the WG determining how to tackle these, but also to determine whether there are any issues missing that would need to be addressed / considered

  Marika Konings:e.g. can these be discussed in parallel, should some be addressed before others can be considered, and should these be tackled by the WG As a whole or via sub-teams

  Mary Wong:These groupings can also be used to clarify the questions in the SO/AC/SG/C input invitations, per Holly's discussion item above.

  Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: The At-Large objective is to increase participation. And we have to educate even as we elicit useful answers. I want the definitions included in the documents. I have looked at your suggsted edits. I think all that is suggested would improve clarity and thus the likely useful responses.

  stephanie perrin:+1!

  Kathy K:Tx Carlton!

  Kathy K:@Carlton, and in fact you raise a key point about participation in NCSG.We need questions that are clear and understandable.

  Carlton Samuels:Chairing the At-Large WHOIS WG has provided some insight

  Kathy K:important insights...

  Carlton Samuels:@Stephanie: I was left wondering when you would've raised that!

  Kathy K:+1 Stephanie

  stephanie perrin:Carlton, you may depend on me to keep bringing it up! :-)

  Kathy K:Don, keep this doc open for a bit??

  Kathy K:(the last doc posted - groupings)

  Don Blumenthal:The groupings doc will stay open

  Holly Raiche:Thanks Don

  Don Blumenthal:Holly, I just saw your hand. Sorry. Was that the issue you had in mind?

  Kathy K:Tx Don.

  Kristina Rosette:I'm on Adobe now.  Apologies for the very late arrival.  I was called into another meeting.

  Carlton Samuels:@Holly: +1

  Kathy K:+2 Holly

  Holly Raiche:We can make suggestions on the list

  Don Blumenthal:Welcome Kristina

  Kristina Rosette:Thanks, Don.  I'll listen to the recording/read the transcript as soon as it's available.

  Kathy K:Don/Marika - should we comment on the mind map, or use Jim's groupings (with my edits) as a starting point?

  Kathy K:(with my edits still proposed?

  Marika Konings:@Kathy - Jim's grouping for comments on the grouping, the mind map for input on the approach and issues that need to be considered

  Carlton Samuels:@Holly: So John came up with 4 groups. Do we have a notion that others might be extracted?  And where do we include/modify questions to address Stephanie's issue?

  Holly Raiche:@ Carlton - just what I was thinking.  I"m already coming up with some suggestions

  John Horton:Thanks, Don.

  Maria Farrell:thanks, don.

  Amr Elsadr:Thanks all.

  Michele Neylon:thanks Don

  Carlton Samuels:Thank you all for this

  Marie-laure Lemineur:thanks Don and all

  Roy Balleste:Thanks all.

  Justin Macy:Thank you!

  Phil Marano:Thanks everyone.


  • No labels