I think if you look at NPOC's earlier positions [to be clear, not the positions put forward by current leadership], it was a fierce advocate of thick WHOIS, whereas the NCUC advocated for a thin WHOIS. So it is understandable, I think, that that is the public perception.

I would also be willing to bet that money on the headline being accurate. A simple read of the EPDP's charter would suggest that it is impossible for the questions asked to be answered in an initial report before the Barcelona meeting. But I very much hope I am wrong - I'd like to be.

Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 24 July 2018 6:26 PM, Michael Karanicolas <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Bit of a click-baity headline. Obviously the EPDP is facing a
> challenging task, but it seems to be a bit of an overstatement to say
> it's doomed to fail just because of these early disagreements.
>
> I was also struck by the line that NPOC is "IP-friendly". Presumably
> that will come as a surprise to their Vice Chair, who was (I believe?)
> a founder of the Pirate Party of Finland...
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Ayden Férdeline [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > I am sharing this article for information purposes, as three of your
> > Councillors on the GNSO Council have been mentioned by name within it:
> > Is the new Whois policy group already doomed to fail?
> > DomainIncite (24 July 2018)
> > http://domainincite.com/23201-is-the-new-whois-policy-group-already-doomed-to-fail
> > I would encourage you to read this article.
> > If you have any questions regarding how we voted on July 19, please let us
> > know, either on-list or off-list, as you prefer. We are accountable, after
> > all, to you.
> > Best wishes,
> > Ayden Férdeline