This Sub Team was formed to perform a preliminary review of public comments received that, while not necessarily or specifically addressing particular recommendations or questions posed by the WG in its Initial Report, nonetheless raise additional topics within the scope of the WG"s charter that merit discussion and consideration by the full WG in its preparation of its Final Report.
Public Comment Review Tool - Template Matrix (blank template provided by staff)
NOTE: The Sub Team has decided not to use this template. Please refer to the agreed template below.
Agreed Sub Team template (prepared by staff based on sub team call of 12 August) - TO BE FILLED IN BY SUB TEAM MEMBERS
Sub Team 4 - master template - 22 Sept - CIRCULATED TO FULL WG FOR DISCUSSION (missing one section not yet reviewed/compiled)
Subteam 4 Report DRAFT - 29 Sept (draft by Paul and Kathy)
Sub Team 4 Report - 4 Oct.doc - CIRCULATED TO FULL WG FOR DISCUSSION (latest version of Kathy's edits based on earlier versions from Paul and Vicky)
Excel spreadsheet of all comments received to 8 July (spreadsheet prepared by Graeme Bunton/Tucows for the WG)
- NOTE: Mac users may experience some difficulty with some Excel functions when reviewing the spreadsheet. The rtf files provided below are an alternative source for the same content.
Sorted non-form-based public comments (rtf text file sorted by ICANN IT directly from the public comment forum)
Sorted form-based public comments (Part 1) (rtf text file sorted by ICANN IT directly from the public comment forum)
Sorted form-based public comments (Part 2) (rtf text file sorted by ICANN IT directly from the public comment forum)
Sorted form-based public comments (Part 3) (rtf text file sorted by ICANN IT directly from the public comment forum)
Sorted form-based public comments (Part 4) (rtf text file sorted by ICANN IT directly from the public comment forum)
- NOTE 1: In combination, all the rtf text documents comprise all public comments received by ICANN as of 10 July 2015. Their contents are thus almost identical to the Tucows spreadsheet - both types of documents are being uploaded to allow for review according to the user's preferred format.
- NOTE 2: The sort performed for the rtf files were ONLY on the Subject Line, and those categorized as "form-based" comments had subject lines that included the following words and phrases - “respect our privacy”; “save domain privacy”; “don’t expose WHOIS data”; or “policy-staff@xxxx …”. As such, a few non-form based comments were likely captured by that sort and placed automatically into the "form-based public comments" category. Conversely, form-based comments that used a different subject line were not captured and thus appear in the "non-form based public comments" category. From a cursory review, there are likely to be many more of the latter than the former.
NEW - WG Public Comment Review Tool Part 4 (updated 14 September with links to individual public comments) - TO BE REVIEWED BY SUB TEAM MEMBERS
Paul McGrady (co-convener)
Kathy Kleiman (co-convener)