RE: [wg-review] DNSO Study

["Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <rod@cyberspaces.org>]

I could support further study as a basis to come up with solutions to the
many identified problem areas within the DNSO (notwithstanding that the
WG-Review will provide timely recommendations on some issues and that we
should allow that process to wind down first). I also agree that the GA
Chair's proposal is not bottom up, and it should be.

Rod



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg-review@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-review@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Eric Dierker
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 7:02 PM
> To: babybows.com
> Cc: wg-review@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-review] DNSO Study
>
>
> Danny,
>
> you have once again written in a most calm, well researched and persuasive
> manner.  What you are proposing is taking all of the hard bottoms
> up work and
> having the top redo it before even submitting it.  You want to
> kill it, that is
> how to do it.  You want to hurt ICANN further this is how to do it.
>
> The powers to be, DoC and all USG are looking for bottoms up
> transparency in
> keeping with the white papers, not top down appointed boards
> meeting in private.
>
> How could all those people you mention do a better job of what we did in
> reflecting internetstakeholders desires.
>
> I reread your post yet another time, you clearly are talking
> about all of you
> guys meeting and changing our report before it gets submitted.
>
> Absolutely NOT.  Of course the decision should be up for a
> consensus discussion,
> with our wonderful chair leading us we will do the right thing.
>
> Sincerely
>
>
> "babybows.com" wrote:
>
> > Posted to the public forum:
> >
> > I thank the ICANN Board for the opportunity to provide input
> regarding ways
> > by which we may come to improve operations of the DNSO as it is
> constituted
> > today, and further appreciate the opportunity to provide
> suggestions which
> > may result in changes in the structure of the DNSO and/or major
> changes in
> > its functioning.  Having been a participant in the Review
> Working Group, I
> > am appreciative of the concerted effort that was made to respond to the
> > Board's request for a general review of the DNSO, and I look forward to
> > seeing the final report of this working group.
> >      My concern is that while ample time and resources were
> dedicated to the
> > first phase of the review project (ten months to determine the
> diagnosis),
> > limited time (5 weeks) has been allowed for the most important
> phase of the
> > project (solutions).  It is my humble opinion that a more comprehensive
> > study is called for, as the possible restructuring of a Supporting
> > Organization is not a matter to be taken lightly.  To the same
> degree that
> > the at-Large study required full and proper funding, as well as a
> > blue-ribbon panel of committee members, so too should a study
> regarding the
> > future of the DNSO be properly convened with ample resources,
> well-respected
> > committee members and an appropriate timeline in which to complete its
> > mission.
> >      I propose the following:  an initial committee consisting of the
> > current and former chairs of the General Assembly, the current
> and former
> > chairs of the Names Council, the chair of the Review Working
> Group, the NC
> > Liaison to the Review Working Group, the Chair of the Review Task Force,
> > ICANN legal counsel, and the Head of the DNSO Secretariat.
> This Committee
> > shall act upon the findings of the review process and propose necessary
> > changes.
> >      The draft report of this committee shall then be submitted to an
> > independent panel for rigorous review (by experts who are
> anonymous to the
> > committee and which shall be selected by the ICANN Board).
> Upon conclusion
> > of this review, the committee will then respond to the panel's
> > recommendations with appropriate revisions, and finally submit a
> > consensus-based report for public comment prior to submission
> to the ICANN
> > Board.
> >
> > Thank you for your consideration,
> > Danny Younger
>

--
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