+ 1 Avri and Tatiana On 6/1/2016 9:47 PM, Tatiana Tropina wrote: > + 1 to Avri, > I think this is my problem with this public comment draft (and I left > several comments about this in the doc). We do need more, but some of > the issues require more time for elaboration. I don't think we can > criticise ICANN for the fact that we haven't got more yet, when the > document we are commenting on says that the work is in progress. > So agree with the positive comment that will say that it's good start > but there is definitely an important work to be done further. > Cheers > Tanya > > On 1 June 2016 at 19:24, avri doria <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > > On 31-May-16 15:58, Mueller, Milton L wrote: > > From what I can read, I would not support the proposed policy. > > I find myself agreeing with the comment that we will eventually need > something more. > And I think that RFC7704 is a good model. > > But I think getting into that issue before we resolve wider > accountability issues WS2 (e.g. ombudsman, or SOAC accountabity) > of the > CCWG-Accountabity is impracticable. I would suggest a statement > that > said good start, lets go with this for now, and determine after WS2, > perhaps in next ATRT, whether more needs to be done. Some element > of the > issue could probably also feed into WS2 work. > > avri > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > -- Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org E: [log in to unmask] | T: +44.771.247.2987