Re: [ga] NC BS

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

On 2002-05-16 15:16:59 +0200, Philip Sheppard wrote:

>   1. Identify the stakeholders who should participate in ICANN 
>   policy development.

>   2. Factor those stakeholders into a policy development body.

>   3. Have a consultation mechanism for the rest of the world.

The rest of the world being those who should not participate in  
policy development, such as individuals like Alexander and myself? 
;-)

More seriously, your approach is based on the assumption that 1 and  
2 are easy tasks.  They aren't, as is demonstrated by the problems  
with registrant and consumer representation in the DNSO.  Also, the  
NC recommendations don't contain any realistic suggestions on how to 
accomplish the tasks.

A (reformed!) GA could, on the other hand, provide an avenue for  
participation to those stakeholder groups which are not (yet?)  
involved in constituencies.  I would imagine that such a GA should  
still be relatively open.  Note that an open GA also kind of 
balances a closed task force approach for the actual policy-making 
work.

-- 
Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
--
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