Re: [ga] Santiago DNSO GA Chair

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Tue, Aug 10, 1999 at 05:16:22PM -0400, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
[...]
> I don't think I'm the only person to recognize the importance of the
> Singapore principles.  It may be "just in my mind", but there's also a link
> to them on the DNSO web page: http://www.icann.org/dnso-formation.html.  You
> can get them taken down, of course, but for the moment they still are there.

What they say on this topic is this:

  The Names Council recommendations should be developed through a
  bottom-up process in which participants in the General Assembly
  take part.  Recommendations approved by a majority of the Names
  Council shall be forwarded to the ICANN Board, accompanied by
  expressions of minority views (including explanations of the
  potential impact of a recommendation on a specific constituency or
  constituencies). 

This language is probably broad enough to be interpreted as
consistent with both your positions.  It is important to note,
however, that it says "Names Council recommendations".  It does not
say "General Assembly recommendations".  And it says "participants in
the General Assembly take part".  "Take part", not "control".  That
is, the ultimate responsibility for recommendations belongs with the
NC; the NC is required to consult with the GA.

The fact is that the bylaws do not give much "power" to the GA.  The 
GA is described as a "forum", and very little else.

If the GA were to have votes on the NC, it would have to 
self-organize.  This is precisely the problem that faced the PAB; 
personally, I think that all the structure that we developed in the 
PAB would fit perfectly in the GA, with almost no modification.  
And, in fact, the parallels with the PAB are quite striking, when 
you look at it.

Would you like to run for Chair? :-)

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain