[ga] Any Policy Language in NC Vote?

["babybows.com" <webmaster@babybows.com>]

As I understand the By-Laws, cited below, now that the DNSO has submitted
its recommendation to the adopt "the existing agreement", if the Board
chooses to decline the recommendation, it must return the recommendation for
further study (improbable in view of time constraints), unless the Board
determines that either the "matter" was not within the scope of the primary
responsibility of the DNSO, or was a matter deemed "necessary" or
"appropriate to further the purposes of ICANN".

As the scope of the DNSO is defined as "policy issues relating to the Domain
Name System", I would inquire about the wording of the DNSO
recommendation... did the Names Council reaffirm their own Melbourne
resolution and frame the recommendation within the context of "a policy
issue", or did they only frame their written arguments on the basis of
substantive merits?

It would be nice to be able to see the full and complete NC document knowing
that " If more than one-half (1/2) but less than two-thirds (2/3) of the
members of the NC determine that the DNSO process has produced a community
consensus, that position may be forwarded to the Board as a NC
recommendation, along with statements of majority and minority views, and
any separate or dissenting statement(s) of any member(s) of the NC."
Perhaps someone call forward the URL of the official NC document?

I am looking forward to the opportunity of listening to the April 2 Board
meeting, which true to the ICANN spirit will assuredly be open, transparent,
and fair.  Perhaps a member of the ICANN staff can advise when this webcast
is scheduled and how the public may listen in to discussions on this, one of
the most important matters that the community has been asked to comment
upon?   For some reason, I cannot find any details posted regarding this
matter on the ICANN site.   An oversight perhaps?    One wouldn't want to
create the impression that matters of such gravity are decided in secret,
out of earshot of the Worldwide Internet Community.


ARTICLE VI: Section 2

(f) If the Board declines to accept any recommendation of a Supporting
Organization, it shall return the recommendation to the Supporting
Organization for further consideration, along with a statement of the
reasons it declines to accept the recommendation. If, after reasonable
efforts, the Board does not receive a recommendation from the Supporting
Organization that it finds meets the standards of Section 2(e) of this
Article VI or, after attempting to mediate any disputes or disagreements
between Supporting Organizations, receives conflicting recommendations from
Supporting Organizations, and the Board finds there is a justification for
prompt action, the Board may initiate, amend or modify and then approve a
specific policy recommendation.

(g) Nothing in this Section 2 is intended to limit the powers of the Board
or the Corporation to act on matters not within the scope of primary
responsibility of a Supporting Organization or to take actions that the
Board finds are necessary or appropriate to further the purposes of the
Corporation.


Best regards,
Danny Younger


--
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