RE: [gnso-consensus-wg] Proposal for discussion July 17

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Agreed Alan, as long as it involves issues within ICANN's mission.  But
it is not a good idea in my opinion to view ICANN (and hence the GNSO)
as a consumer protection organization because it is not part of their
mission, they do not have the resources to do that and there are
organizations already in place to handle that.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
        Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:35 AM
        To: gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: RE: [gnso-consensus-wg] Proposal for discussion July 17
        
        
        Without commenting on the original reference, "consumer
protection" may be out of scope, but crafting within-scope policy which
factors in consumer needs and impact must certainly be relevant.
        
        Alan
        
        At 15/07/2008 03:57 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
        

                Philip,
                 
                I am curious as to why you included 'consumer
protection' experts in the list of possible areas of expertise for
NomCom reps.  It is my understanding that consumer protection is outside
ICANN's mission.
                 
                Chuck
                
                

________________________________

                        From: owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx [
mailto:owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf Of Philip
Sheppard
                        
                        Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 11:12 AM
                        
                        To: gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
                        
                        Subject: [gnso-consensus-wg] Proposal for
discussion July 17
                        
                        
                        Please find attached a proposal for discussion
at our next call July  17.
                        
                        
                          
                        This is a compromise proposal attempting to lie
within the bounding statements made on previous calls by the
constituencies.
                        
                        
                          
                        It is sent now to allow time for constituency
discussion before our call.
                        
                        
                          
                        Philip