RE: [nc-whois] Final (?): Accuracy

["Abel Wisman" <abel@able-towers.com>]

If that is correct, which I will accept, then I would indeed at the very
least appreciate the following be added :

Dissenting opinion of Abel Wisman (GA): In view of the postal delivery
times outside the USA, the lengthened holidays in some countries across
the world and the general difficulty in contacting people in certain
parts of the world, it would be prudent for ICANN and the registrars to
address leniency towards the 15 day period for cases which are not
overtly fraudulent, while the task force continues her work on her
recommendations regarding the accuracy of the whois data.


Thank you.

Abel 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Metalitz [mailto:metalitz@iipa.com] 
Sent: 28 November 2002 01:13
To: 'Abel Wisman '; ''Thomas Roessler' '; 'nc-whois@dnso.org '
Subject: RE: [nc-whois] Final (?): Accuracy


Abel's comment was the impetus for the discussion about how the 15 day
period is applicable to registrars, not to ICANN, and that there was
considerable uncertainty in some quarters about how registrars would
define the category of "cases not clearly fraudulent."  So I do not
believe there was consensus to include this in the report.  Of course it
could be included
as an individual view.   

In the spirit that even the best things must come to an end, let me
offer my view that the time to make changes in these two sections of the
final report before they are posted is at an end.  Collectively, we have
devoted thousands of hours to this process, culminating in our
line-by-line review in a 2.5-hour conference call today, and it would
not be fair to see the final outcome determined by who happens to be
awake or online the instant before the posting is made.  Of course,
there will be further opportunities for comment between the time the
final report is posted and the time the Names Council acts upon it.  But
for now let's focus on getting the report, as we have finalized it,
posted, and on providing whatever assistance we can to those TF members
who have undertaken to do this.  

Steve Metalitz   

-----Original Message-----
From: Abel Wisman
To: 'Thomas Roessler'; nc-whois@dnso.org
Sent: 11/27/2002 7:34 PM
Subject: RE: [nc-whois] Final (?): Accuracy

I believe there was a consensus or at least a no objection to adding to
1C (?) an advise to ICANN to implement the 15 day period with leniency
in cases not clearly fraudulent and outside of the USA considering
time-frames of postal deliveries to such areas.

I would appreciate it if this was added.

Kind regards

Abel


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nc-whois@dnso.org [mailto:owner-nc-whois@dnso.org] On Behalf
Of Thomas Roessler
Sent: 27 November 2002 22:05
To: nc-whois@dnso.org
Subject: [nc-whois] Final (?): Accuracy


Here's the accuracy chapter in HTML, including a variety of links. I
have taken the liberty to add a little headline to IC.

-- 
Thomas Roessler                        <roessler@does-not-exist.org>