Re: [wg-review] 4. [GA] Draft Text Clarification

[Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com>]

At 12:18 AM 2/10/01, Eric Dierker wrote:
> > (c) Membership in the GA shall consist of those individuals listed in the
> > GA Voting Registry.
>
>Who determines this?

Registering voters is a Secretariat function - the form to submit can be 
found at http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-voting-registry.html


> > (d) Participants in the GA shall nominate, pursuant to procedures adopted
> > by the NC and approved by the Board, persons to serve on the Board in those
> > seats reserved for the DNSO.
>
>Why did you switch from membership to participants?  And why are the 
>procedures
>determined by the NC?

No reason on the switch - it can be changed to members for consistency. 
Procedures are determined by the NC because under the bylaws the NC is 
actually the responsible body for electing the Board members. This was 
taken straight from the existing bylaws.

> > (e) Officers of the GA shall include a chair, a co-chair, and an ombudsman.
> > Officers of the GA shall be elected annually according to the voting
> > procedures adopted by the GA and approved by the NC.
>
>Where does this "approved by the NC come from?"  Check out the "SOs" they 
>do not
>have parental guidance.

The GA is not an SO - it's part of an SO, and the NC is the governing body 
of the SO. This is a "dotting the i and crossing the t" line.

> > (f) The Officers of the GA shall be members of the Names Council.
> >
> > (g) The ombudsman shall be responsible for investigating process issues
> > within the DNSO, including but not limited to conflicts involving the Names
> > Council as a whole. The ombudsman shall report directly to the ICANN Board
> > of Directors.
>
>Excuse me, I would much rather they report to the GA.

Well, the GA has no standing to do anything with such a report. Typically 
an ombudsman function involving a dispute between two layers of a structure 
will report to the supervising structure of the higher layer. The 
supervising structure of the NC is the Board of Directors.

> > (h) Each constituency formed under Article VI-B Section 3 of these bylaws
> > shall select one member as the constituency observer to the GA. Each 
> observer
> > will be responsible for informing their constituency of the GA's current
> > activities on a timely basis.
>
>That is with the constituency charters not within the GA.  Why all this self
>imposed coalition with the commercial oriented constituencies.

This was a suggestion by Bret Fausett, to address the need for more 
participation in both the GA and the constituencies. I am unaware of it 
being suggested by any constituency.

> > There shall be no other fees required to participate in the GA. The
> > costs of GA mailing lists or other online mechanisms for performing the
> > work of the GA shall be the responsibility of the DNSO.
>
>Let us be prudent here on poor people lest the new Secretary overseeing our
>activities, Powell, think there is a divide. IP people stay at the Waldorf 
>and GA
>at the Y.

Of course there is a financial divide - no one is pretending there isn't. 
This is a simple expansion of the existing bylaws in order to explicitly 
state that the online functions of the GA are required functions and need 
to be paid for by the DNSO.

> > (l) Upon application by no less than five members of the GA, the Chair of
> > the GA may recognize a Special Interest Group (SIG). Upon such recognition,
> > a SIG shall have a mailing list created by the Secretariat of the DNSO.
> > Each SIG shall have a clearly defined interest area, and shall produce
> > regular reports for the GA's consideration in that area. Each application
> > shall contain a definition of the interest area; a SIG name; and the SIG's
> > method for self-organization.
>
>You got me on this last one, Please explain.

Working groups are large and noisy, which limits their effectiveness AND 
increases their effectiveness. Working groups can currently only be 
explicitly created by the Names Council, on issues the NC thinks are 
amenable to handling through a WG. Working Group creation is typically 
handled by creating a list, an archive for the list, and making an 
announcement.

What this portion of the proposal does is develop a mechanism for bottom-up 
created groups, and guarantees that such groups will get at least a mailing 
list for their work. While the NC can accept a recommendation from any 
member of the GA, a SIG structure will allow those with common interests to 
group together and hopefully produce more throrough reports for 
consideration by the GA itself, and the NC.

Hope that helps,

Regards,
Greg

sidna@feedwriter.com

--
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