RE: [gnso-consensus-wg] New GNSO Reform Concept

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

All good questions Avri and questions we will need to discuss.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 1:27 PM
> To: gnso-consensus-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-consensus-wg] New GNSO Reform Concept
> 
> 
> hi,
> 
> a question about the bicameral solution from one of my fellow NAs:
> 
>   is the NA appointed by the nomcom specifically for the 
> assigned chamber?  or does the chamber choose from a slate of 
> potential NAs?
> 
> and a few that occur to me.
> 
> - is the one commercial NA non commercial  NA formula still 
> applicable?
> 
> - will the numbers of participants in each of the chambers be 
> preset by by-law or will it be up to the machinations within 
> each of the chambers?  can a chamber that starts off with 
> internal parity decide to move away from such parity?
> 
> btw, the more i think about this solution the more i believe 
> it is way complex and likely to have many unintended effects. 
>  one positive unintended effect will be that we will be more 
> then able to accommodate requests for longer review cycles.
> 
> 
> 
> a.
> 
>