Re: [ga] Response to your posting on the NC List

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Bret and all assembly members, stakeholders or other interested parties,

Bret Fausett wrote:

> So here's the game I'd play if I were in charge of the registrars. I'd
> divide the 140 odd registrars into three groups, figuring that opposition
> from 40+ registrars is certainly the kind of thing that could kill a
> "consensus" policy. I'd steer the (G/D)NSO policy process as best I could
> with my single task force representative, asking the rest of my constituency
> to stay quiet. I'd see what the task force recommended to the NC. Regardless
> of the result, I'd figure that I could still make the result better for my
> registrar interests. I'd then ask my first block of registrars to weigh in
> with their vigorous opposition. We'd negotiate a little more at the NC
> level, make the process better for registrars and come up with a new
> recommendation for the Board. At this point, my second registrar block of 40
> would noisily complain about the result. We'd repeat the negotiations and
> make things even better for the Board vote. I'd still have 40 previously
> silent registrars to file an independent review if I remained unhappy with
> the result.
>
> That's not the way this is supposed to work, is it? Isn't there an
> obligation on impacted parties to come forward with their views as early as
> possible, preferably during the task force process via the task force
> representative?

  It would be best if the impacted parties, including registrants as well
as Registrars to come forward as soon a possible.  But the timing
really should not matter all that much if and issue is truly open for
debate, and consideration of various positions and considerations.
Also why should any impacted party be required in a truly open
and transparent process and organization, be required to go through
any third party, such as the task force Rep in this case?  Makes little
or no good sense and is divisive in various ways as we have seen
already.

>
>
>           -- Bret
>
> --
> 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

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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