RE: [bc-gnso] Draft STI Report - V4 for your review
- To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>, bc - GNSO list <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Draft STI Report - V4 for your review
- From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:48:27 -0500
Excellent points, Philip.I am just trying to recall, though, what the current
practice on minority reports has been on Council reports. You (Philip) will be
the expert on this point -- I was just recalling that many years ago,when I
charied the TF on WHOIS, the Minority report was noted in the introduction, but
was attached so that it could be read in its entirety. We did make reference
in the body that there was a minority report....
What has been the current practice within the Council's prepared reports on
It looked to me like the STI group wasn't sympathetic to incorporating the
detailed objections into the body of the report.
I also join Philip and others in thanking Zahid and Mike and Phil Corwin for
their work on this group. It was a LOT of hard work.
I am disappointed that we aren't getting some of the key elements that the BC
had asked for and I think provided rational support for. This working group
had a very tough assignment. My appreciation to the BC members on their work,
Subject: [bc-gnso] Draft STI Report - V4 for your review
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:09:14 +0100
once again many
thanks for your work on this.
It is absolutely
essential that we do not let go of this opportunity to right a major flaw in
current proposals for new TLDs.
So AIM supports the
position you are taking.
reports from constituencies
Personally I believe
the shifting of minority report detail from constituencies to an annex is a bad
It compromises the
essential communication and provides a false perception of unanimity.
annexes are not expected to contain substantive material relevant to a decision
When they do it is
typically a result of an intent to mislead.
If we have lost this
argument on the STI group so be it.
But it is worth
making this higher level point and perhaps raising the principle to Council or
one of the admin groups to establish a general policy about the construct of
opinion WITHIN the BC
We do try to work by
consensus and have a system in place to solve disputes by debate or ultimately
When time does not
allow for that it may be appropriate to provide decision makers with relevant
information on disagreement and so mention specifically the organisations
objecting. That way the rationale of the objection can be understood in
Hope this helps.