RE: [wg-b] Voting Results and What We Do Next

["Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net>]

Ben Edleman of the Harvard Berkman Center has posted to the ga list a draft
proposal on NC procedure at:

<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/dnso/ncprocedure/>

Of particular interest to our group might be the following excerpt:


The New Role of the Working Groups
 

            Another major change we suggest is placing a greater amount of
responsibility for writing and reporting on the working groups.  The Names
Council retains control of the working group’s mandate.  We recommend the
Names Council to consider having working groups act as the “quill” of Names
Council recommendations.  With “quill” we do not mean the author of Names
Council recommendations.  Instead, holding the “quill” implies researching
topics, organizing this research into well-researched and detailed
presentations, and acting as the resident “experts” on particular subjects.
 We believe the shift of the “quill” from the Names Council to working
groups is critical if the procedures we outline here are to be effective.
However, when deemed necessary, the Names Council may still temporarily
take over the “quill” function from a working group.  The Names Council
should ideally be presented with working group reports, incorporating both
Names Council discussion and comment, ready to be voted either up or down.
Designation of working groups as the primary “quill” of Names Council
recommendations will enable the Names Council to concentrate on discussing
substantive issues rather than trying to formulate the text of such
recommendations during their meetings.












@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @