Iliya (and Michael W.): 
It's easy to get lost in the labyrinth of the ICANN web site,
suborganizations and task forces. I myself wasn't even aware of the
latest MAria Farrell thing, having taken my eyes off the relevant
mailing list for about rhree days. ugh. 


>>> Iliya Nickelt <[log in to unmask]> 7/18/2006 6:13:43 AM >>>
On 17 Jul 2006 at 19:20, Milton Mueller wrote:
> Hate to sound impatient, but please check what ICANN has actually
posted
> before complaining about it. 
> 
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/correspondence.html 

Unfortunatly (for me) Milton is right once more. In the resolution it 
says that
"The ICANN staff will provide a summary of the other" [!!] 
"interpretations of the definition"

It just so happened that all *other* definitions proposed were about 
"whois use for legal matters" aka formulation 1. Those not included
only 
defended the standard technical definition (2), and did not re-define
it, 
so there was no reason to include it.

My first (not so very surprising) misinterpretation was that the table

was supposed to give a complete overview different definitions for
whois 
on the basis of the comments recieved. I got it wrong and Maria Farrell

only did ICANN staff was asked to do. Let's just hope that other
council 
members do not make my mistake and read the other input, too.
 
Sorry for the confusion -- never trust your prejudices. 
	--iliya
(objectivity does make politics more difficult, though)