Re: [council] RE: [nc-review] REMINDER DNSO Review

["YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>]

> I just wanted to keep the dialog going so this thing moves forward.

I agree with Caroline.

> I would be interested to hear what others thoughts are on their
> interpretation of how we should proceed.

My thought about NC-review process and WG formation.

The first motivation NC could implement this review process has been
based upon the outcries out of NC, even though it was not acknowldeged
that way.

Some NC members once claimed,
"we've never heard anything from PEOPLE on what NC has been doing."

However, under the suggestion by ICANN Board and its staff,
NC was assigned to carry out this task -this should have done in a more
proactive manner by NC ourselves, though- and

NC has been expected to sound

what could have been improved,
what could have been modified,
what could have been gone for the better future of ICANN/DNSO etc..

Not surprisingly to me, many people showed their frustration by a proposal
that CONSTITUENCY itself and NAMES COUNCIL should be GONE
since they found NO ROLE except Board Election which we just did.

Well, therefore first I would like to urge NC members to take this
responsibility
more seriously and second, as we have seen the background of how this review
committee came to its birth, we'd better give the CREDITS to PEOPLE
outside since they are the one who initiated this efforts by creating a WG
where
they can unfold their views as liberal as possible under their
responsibilities.

Until our next teleconference, we have around One-Week.
It is a good news though. Paul and Caroline have been working on this
and I think we can have a productive teleconference on Sept. 21.

Have a good weekend, too.:-)

YJ