Re: [wg-review] DNDEF, GA, & NC

[Eric Dierker <ERIC@HI-TEK.COM>]

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

     (a) The GA shall be an open forum for participation in the work of the
DNSO, and open to all who are willing to contribute effort to the
     work of the DNSO. The participants in the GA should be individuals who have
a knowledge of and an interest in issues pertaining to
     the areas for which the DNSO has primary responsibility, and who are
willing to contribute time, effort and expertise to the work of
     the DNSO, including work item proposal and development, discussion of work
items, draft document preparation, and participation
     in research and drafting committees and working groups.

     (b) The GA shall meet at least once a year, if possible in conjunction with
regularly scheduled meetings of the ICANN Board. To the
     maximum extent practicable, all meetings should be available for online
attendance as well as physical attendance.

     (c) The costs of GA meetings shall be the responsibility of the DNSO, which
may levy an equitable, cost-based fee on GA attendees
     to recoup those costs. There shall be no other fees required to participate
in the GA.

     (d) The GA shall nominate, pursuant to procedures adopted by the NC and
approved by the ICANN Board, persons to serve on the
     Board in those seats reserved for the DNSO.

After reading this which is found on the Official site, it is completely
illogical to proclaim the assembly to be an activity.  You would constantly be
saying the activity of the activity.

This is also responsive to Joanna's last well thought out post.  These
dicussions while educational and insightful have trouble leading to concrete
recommendations because of lack of foundational definitions.


Sincerely,


"Babybows.com" wrote:

> Dear Kent,
>      A contract is a business relationship, jointly entered into for
> mutually satisfying reasons.  Those parties that have entered into a
> contract with ICANN are not "governed" entities in a democracy; they are
> contractors who have agreed to abide by current and future policy provisions
> established by the ICANN Board.   Policy decisions will clearly impact these
> contracting parties, but they have placed their trust in ICANN (which will
> only create new policies as a result of a consensus process) to reasonably
> protect their interests.  As ICANN is a California Non-Profit Public Benefit
> Corporation, consensus decisions ostensibly should stem from the Public for
> the Benefit of the Public; as such voting rights in a policy-recommending
> body such as the DNSO should accrue to the Public moreso than to Special
> Interest Groups (as represented by the current constituency structure).
>      While you are correct in your assessment of the GA as an "activity",
> rather than a "body", I would argue that this need not be the case, and is
> in fact a matter that could be changed by an amendment to the By-Laws.  I
> see a need for greater public participation in the DNSO, and believe that
> enhancing the power of the GA through granting it seats on the Names Council
> would be an effective way to increase Public participation.
>
> --
> 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

--
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