[wg-review] [Names Council] Review TF Questionnaire

[Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

One of the questions in the Names Council section of Review Document:

"Q: The NC recommendations 
have been criticized as often being 'weak', or
merely reflecting the outcome 
of the respective working groups. How can the
NC interpret the outcome of the 
working groups, and formulate a better
defined and stronger recommendations 
consistent with the consensus process?"

First off, by establishing wide-based, representative WGs of some duration (will there be an extension here or no?).  Applying to these a liberal use of polls 
as guages for sentiment and issue maintenance, such that, resolutions may be reached by majorities and progress measured.  Paying more attention to 
the quantifiable outcomes of a polling process. Facilitating a process of self-regulation/organization for all such and similar WGs.  Paying more attention to 
the quantifiable outcomes of a polling process.  (Did I mention that already? oh well...  ;-)) Suffice to say, that those who show up for things like these 
WGs do so because they wish to do so, or because it's their job... there's really nothing half-way about it.  Many people care about the Internet, how 
many have the time?  (Not to mention that the news of this WG, indeed all past WGs, even of ICANN @Large Membership, has not been loudly 
announced.  I mean, this stuff didn't exactly make the six o'clock evening news in every household on the planet.  The relevant stats can be viewed at 
the bottom of page: http://members.icann.org/activestats.html  Of interest on this page is the 171 respondents of the total 76,183 verified Members, who 
learned of ICANN @Large Membership via banners.  One would think a more visible campaign could have been accomplished via Internet banners by 
an organization like ICANN?  Outreach?!?!  I think it would be interesting to poll the 158593 as yet unverified applicants as to the source of their 
infomation.)  If a true consensus building program is to move forward, the NC must accept the evidence of our presence as indication of committed, 
indeed purposeful interest. The NC must recognize the fundamentally authentic and justified claim to a proportional @Large voice in any 
recommendations process or SO espousing consensual outreach and consolidation of all stakeholders in the DNS. 

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
          Hermes Network, inc. 


  


--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html