Re: [nc-org] Let's respect and try to retain bottom up process

["Milton Mueller" <mueller@syr.edu>]

Cary:
I really don't think we have time to get
involved in a wide-ranging debate about 
ICANN processes in this TF. We have about 
two weeks to solve a specific problem 
relating to dot org. 

As I expected, the TF "work" so far consists 
mostly of a dialogue between you and me,
not a good sign.

FWIW, I think we should check in with Touton
once we have decided on some amendments to
see if they allay his concerns. That may
(or may not) mean including him on the telecon;
I consider that a subordinate issue.

To break my rule and discuss process once
again, but only in a way that might lay to
rest some of your concerns, the "last minute"
change in the org report was proposed by
Phil Shepperd, not me. 

I went along with it
under the apparently false impression that
as Chair of NC people would accept it in
good faith and not as part of some conspiracy.

There is nothing in the rules that prevents
the assembled NC from amending a TF report,
whether last-minute or no. The changes Phil
proposed were fairly non-substantive.
They simply deleted the dreaded words, 
"sponsored unrestricted" without altering
the policy one whit. 

The substitution of the word "qualify" for
the word "accredit" in the section on registrars
was specifically mentioned by Touton as an
ambiguity that needed to be cleared up. 
If the registrar representative on this task
force had been paying attention, he would have
recognized that that change was both necessary
and, relative to the original language, improved
the interests of registrars. 

That's all history.

Can we start working now?

--MM