Re: [ga] Comments on GA section of Review Task Force report

[Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Greg Burton wrote:

> ------
> Comments:
> 
> 1. "no little" should be replaced with "little" - this appears to be a 
> typo.
> It would probably be more accurate to say that GA participation is 
> sporadic,
> depending on circumstances.

How periodic is involvement? are there any numbers?  what are the 
conditions etc...?

> 
> 2. Thirteen WG-Review members responded to a poll on the Task Force 
> question
> "Is the GA properly defined?" Twelve answered "no", and one didn't know.
> This perceived lack of definition probably contributes to both the
> participation and authority issues. A better definition of the GA will
> probably require changes to the ICANN bylaws.

> 3. The GA as a group appears to lack any authority whatsoever. It has no
> mandated abilities beyond nominating ICANN BoD members.
> 
> Text:
> -------
> How to address the current structural problems to enhance the GA within
> the DNSO has received much discussion, and should be further addressed.
> -------
> Comments:
> ***
> 1. The ICANN Bylaws state that "the NC shall elect the Chairman of the GA
> annually."
> 
> As of February 1, 2001 the General Assembly lacks a chair, as Mr Roberto
> Gaetano's term has expired. Mr. Gaetano brought this issue up in November
> 2000 at the Marina Del Rey meetings, well in advance of this 
> circumstance.
> Mr Gaetano indicated at that time that he would be willing to continue 
> for
> a few months, and recommended that the bylaws be amended to allow direct
> vote for the GA chair by the GA itself. On January 30, 2001, Mr Gaetano
> wrote to the GA (http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc06/msg00087.html):
> 
> "...I have the impression that nothing moves, and that therefore we 
> may found
> ourselves at the next meeting at more or less the same point."
> 
> At this point in time, 10 weeeks later, it does not appear that the NC 
> has
> yet placed this item on it's agenda, or had substantive discussions on 
> the
> NC council list.

Obvious oversight? or dereliction? Who (specifically) is/was in charge 
of keeping track
of such things (i.e. Roberto's term expiring and selection process)?   
Is this not some sort
of secretariat function?  or do NCers just scrawl this sort of thing on 
Post-it notes? How
does it work?

> 
> (http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010208.NCtelecon-agenda.html) Unless 
> this
> is addressed at the regularly-scheduled Names Council teleconference on
> February 26, Mr Gaetano's statement appears correct. It should also be 
> noted
> that the NC has been unable to address all of it's agenda items in the
> timeframe allocated to these items, and simply placing it on the 
> agenda does
> not mean that it will be dealt with promptly.

A reminder usually helps.



Sotiris Sotiropoulos
       Hermes Network, Inc.

--
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