Re: [ga] Notes from today's NC call.

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Thomas has mentioned a proposal put forth by the IPC:

<< J. Scott Evans of the Intellectual Property constituency gave some 
 insights about the current IPC thinking about future policy 
 development. One proposal seems to be to move it to the Board level 
 and to create ad hoc and/or standing committees with members picked 
 based on expertise, with staff and board liaisons. >>

Allow me to comment on why this is a horribly bad proposal (using a real-life 
example).

Ms. YJ Park was nominated to participate on the President's TLD Evaluation 
Task Force.  YJ is known to many of us for her critical observations.  In a 
letter posted today to the NCDNHC at 
http://www.icann-ncc.org/pipermail/discuss/2002-April/001951.html YJ states:  

<>

Here is an instance where a well-respected member of our community was 
ejected from a meeting that she had every right to attend by ICANN 
Management.  I wrote to YJ to make sure that I had correctly understood her 
comment, asking:

<< Are you stating that Stuart did not want you to attend and participate in 
that meeting, or that you (for some reason) were called away from that 
meeting?>>

She replied:  <<The former.>>

Standing Committees whose participants can be chosen and deselected by ICANN 
management at whim are not in our best interest as structures in a reformed 
ICANN.  

My sympathies go out to YJ.
--
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