Re: [gnso-consensus-wg] Nom Comm appointee roles

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Several comments. First, it is not clear to me (or from the quotation 
from Avri/Olga, that NomCom appointees are responsible solely for 
representing users.
Ignoring that for the moment, "is intended to" is a telling phrase. 
The old GNSO was expected to have new constituencies pop up. The BGP 
report say the it will require a lot of work to create such 
constituencies within the new stakeholders group.
If at the next review, all these new constituencies exist and are 
alive and well, perhaps it may then be time to re-think the NomCom role.
Spoken by a NomCom appointee who was not active in ICANN, prior to 
his appointment less than 2 years ago, and who would not likely have 
been "reached out to" by any constuituency or constituency-seeders.
Alan

At 14/07/2008 03:35 AM, Philip Sheppard wrote:

> Lets move this argument away from personalities.
>
> For me the logic gap in the concept of nomcom appointees is the following.
>
> The new commercial users group is intended to outreach and present a 
> compromise position of
> the diverse views of the  globe's commercial users.
> The new non-commercial users group is intended to outreach and 
> present a compromise position
> of the diverse views of the globe's non-commercial users.
>
> Just what perspective is left for NomCom delegates?
> By what logic are three votes more relevant than a process that 
> outreaches and presents a
> compromise position of the diverse views of the globe's users?
>
> Philip