Re: [wg-review] Karl's assigned objective.

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

> On 23:25 07/01/01, Karl Auerbach said:
> >No problem:  The DNSO is to produce well reasoned policy decisions based
> >based on fair and objective processes that permit all interested parties
> >to participate on an equal basis.
>
> and we should read "policy propositions" and on "fair, qualified and
> objective" Otherwise it would not be consistent withe rest of your
> positions?

Actually I prefer the word "decisions".  I'd like to be able to sit in my
comfy board-of-directors chair and ask only whether the DNSO policy
decision was reached via well defined processes in which every who wants
to participate had the opportunity to do so on par with everyone else.

For the most part, I'd prefer it if the board rarely, if ever, exercised
its power to make DNS policy but rather left it up to well run ICANN
public policymaking processes.

Of course, if one reads the ICANN bylaws as they exist today that is what
they very clearly say - but as we have seen from the rejection of my
"request for reconsideration" on that point, ICANN's official policy makes
that bylaw language nothing more than meaningless surplussage.

		--karl--


--
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