RE: [ga] Consensus... Definition?

["Roberto Gaetano" <ga_list@hotmail.com>]

Chuck Gomes wrote:

>
>(Chuck) - Yes, I do think that the DNSO should reach out to nonmembers as
>part of the consensus process.  The more stakeholders who are represented 
>in
>a consensus process the more valid the consensus will be.  And I think it 
>is
>accurate to conclude that the DNSO does not have adequate involvement by
>many stakeholders.  At the same time those unrepresented stakeholders may 
>be
>impacted by the policy being considered.  I think that the consensus
>development process should include steps such as attempting to identify key
>stakeholders and then trying to involve any unrepresented stakeholders in
>the process.  If they are unresponsive, the efforts can be documented along
>with their unresponsiveness.  Then the NC, in its role of managing the
>consensus process and in its responsibility to determine whether a 
>consensus
>has been reached, would be able to see that efforts were made to involve 
>all
>stakeholders.  That in my opinion makes the consensus process stronger.
>

I agree that some effort has to be spent in order to bring more people in 
the DNSO.
Once upon a time we had WG-E: Chon managed to do a huge work, but 
unfortunately we never went past the stage of the analysis, and the only 
recommendation that has been ever put into practice was the induction 
session at the beginning of the ICANN meetings.
Hopefully, if we can manage to have a more multilingual approach, following 
the work of the SLT Task Force, we may have more interest from the 
non-english-speaking community.

Regards
Roberto




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

--
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