Re: [wg-c] Straw Vote

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

I agree strongly with Jonathan. This group is finally beginning
to make solid progress. It now needs to proceed as it is and
identify where consensus does and does not exist. While I have
always believed that November is the most realistic time to
shoot for completing our report, if we can do it faster we ought to.

I reject Mr. Cochetti's suggestion
that this WG is so provisional in nature that it is nothing
but a discussion forum in a holding pattern. Indeed, there is no
support whatsoever for that suggestion.

When Working Groups A, B and C were created I
did not hear any protests from M's Cochetti, Cohen or Cade
about the interim status of the Names Council or any
warnings against acting as a "legislative body."

On the contrary, it seems that all WGs were given extremely
ambitious charters and unbelievably aggressive schedules,* with
their knowledge and assent. (Please correct me if I am wrong.
Perhaps there are some comments in pNC meetings or emails
sent to the DNSO I am unaware of?)

And it seems as if WG A, on TM dispute resolution, rammed
through its recommendations according to the pNC's schedule
without a peep of dissent from the Business or TM/IP
constituencies; indeed, it seems to have happened with their
full support.

Mr. Cochetti, I hope you can clarify for us whether your
concerns about the interim status of the pNC and the need
to avoid acting as a "legislative body" apply to ALL working
groups, including working groups A and B?

If not, can you explain what is different about this WG
other than that it is not, perhaps, going the way you would
like?

--Milton Mueller

* As members of this list know, I have been a strong critic
of the rapid WG schedules set by the pNC. They made it
impossible to achieve real consensus and they appeared to be attempts
to enact crucial policies before there was a complete ICANN
Board, much less a complete Names Council.

Jonathan Weinberg wrote:

> our recommendations will be entitled to weight in their
> deliberations, because we are the body they set up to do the work of
> formulating recommendations; because we'll have done a lot of work
> formulating recommendations that work; and because we are representative,
> in the sense that all affected interests can participate.