Re: [ga] DNSO Review - Questions on DNSO Responsibilities

["!Dr. Joe Baptista" <baptista@proxy.pccf.net>]

I think the DNSO has been run by horseshitters and it shows.  Congratulate
yourselves for being the net's best kept joke.

regards
joe baptista

On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> *******************************************************************
> 
> III. DNSO Responsibilities:
> 
> The DNSO is responsible for advising the ICANN Board with respect to 
> policy issues relating to the domain name system. The DNSO’s primary 
> responsibility is to develop and recommend substantive policies 
> regarding to the domain name system. Additionally, the Board can refer 
> substantive policies regarding the domain name system to the DNSO for 
> initial consideration and recommendation to the Board.
> 
> To date, the DNSO has been tasked with the following responsibilities:
> 
> A. Universal Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP): Working Group A, Names 
> Council’s review of Working Group A report, followed by the Names 
> Council recommendation based on the Working Group A’s report to the 
> Board and the final adoption by the ICANN Board.
> 
> B. new generic Top Level Domains (new gTLDs): Working Group B and C, 
> Names Council review of Working Group B and C’s reports, followed by its
>  recommendations to the Board.
> 
> C. DNSO ICANN Board Elections: Two elections held: 1) October 1999, 
> choosing three ICANN Board members for 3, 2, 1 years respectively; 2) 
> September 2000, filling the three year seat for the 1 year expired seat.
> 
> 
> ·	To what extent has the DNSO fulfilled the responsibilities in A, B and
>  C?
> 
> ·	Have the policies recommended by the DNSO represented an adequate 
> consensus of the affected stakeholders?  Have the 	viewpoints of all 
> stakeholders been considered?
> 
> ·	Have the recommendations been well defined, useful in terms of being 
> timely and being structured with a degree of specificity/flexibility 
> appropriate to allow practical implementation?
> 
> ·	To the extent the recommendations have been adopted as policies, have 
> they received the support of those being asked to implement them?
> 
> ·	Has the DNSO failed to address problems that have been called to its 
> attention through the Names Council?
> 
> 
> ·	Does the DNSO performance require improvement, and if so, how?
> 
> ·	Are the responsibilities of the components (NC, Constituencies, GA) 
> and the relationship among them well defined?
> 
> ·	How can the DNSO minimize the amount of subjectivity and increase the 
> amount of objective consensus building, with its current structure? With
>  a different structure?
> 
> ·	Has the DNSO process brought expertise to the issues it has addressed?
>   If not, how can the degree of expertise be 	enhanced?
> 
> *******************************************************************
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 

-- 
Joe Baptista

                                        http://www.dot.god/
                                        dot.GOD Hostmaster
                                        +1 (805) 753-8697

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html