<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Thanks Ayden and Fik,
          I shall push with renewed vigour :-)  We now have till Friday
          COB if anyone thinks of specific issues...</font></font></p>
    <p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">SP</font></font><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-05-03 05:26, Ayden Férdeline
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:QXSRlP5rMKAcut2uBx5teM91IjYpUdPg058JKhoKp9m79OklbHWAwbYJ2EDFTqqRUChaJByKvPWsvSqmNP39Yd8l4N91MBV-VpRSwT_v3Zk=@ferdeline.com">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div>I think you are being too diplomatic in there, Stephanie. <br>
      </div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>Please don't give the RT the option to reject your comments;
        please insist that your two-pager objecting to Recommendation #2
        be included... we cannot let this RT whitewash the situation.<br>
      </div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>Thanks for all that you do,</div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div class="protonmail_signature_block">
        <div class="protonmail_signature_block-user">
          <div>Ayden <br>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div class="protonmail_signature_block-proton
          protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐<br>
      </div>
      <div> On 2 May 2018 8:47 PM, Stephanie Perrin
        <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca"><stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca></a> wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <div> <br>
      </div>
      <blockquote class="protonmail_quote" type="cite">
        <p><span class="size" style="font-size:undefinedpx"><span
              class="font" style="font-family:Lucida Grande">Attached
              are my preliminary comments on the WHOIS review team 2
              initial findings.  This is the rollup of the subgroups
              work, which we recently discussed in Brussels.  I objected
              strenuously to one item, that the Board had delivered on
              its responsibilities re a policy.  I think the EWG was a
              violation of the MS process, the failure of the RDS was a
              failure of ICANN as a whole (not the GNSO as Alan G
              claims) and that the Board initiated interim policy is a
              fundamental failure of the MS process.....</span></span><br>
        </p>
        <p><span class="size" style="font-size:undefinedpx"><span
              class="font" style="font-family:Lucida Grande">anyway I
              have asked for more time, which I doubt the Chair will
              grant.  Volker, who did not attend the meeting, has not
              had time to go over it.  He is the only contracted party
              there (there are 3 GAC members) and they have to live with
              all our recommendations, which I find fundamentally wrong.</span></span><br>
        </p>
        <p><span class="size" style="font-size:undefinedpx"><span
              class="font" style="font-family:Lucida Grande">Let me know
              if you have comments, I will push to get them added.  They
              are rushing this through when we are all GDPRing....</span></span><br>
        </p>
        <p><span class="size" style="font-size:undefinedpx"><span
              class="font" style="font-family:Lucida Grande">cheers
              Steph</span></span><br>
        </p>
      </blockquote>
      <div><br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>