RE: [gnso-contro-wg] final Draft - rev 04
Avri: My apologizes for being so silent, however, I have had my head buried in the geographic and geopolitical subgroup. Notwithstanding my silence, I have been following the work of the group. While I have some reservation about the removal of the consensus safety mechanism, I will respect the limitation of the GNSO telling other supporting organizations and advisory groups on how they go about reaching a decision. However, where I do have a strong position is in connection with properly documenting how a decision is reached. As the LSE review of the GNSO reported there is the need for a more accurate picture of where individuals/organizations stand on specific decisions. Merely reporting a vote of X council members is not consistent with the open and transparent requirements set forth in the ICANN bylaws, and does not help the ICANN Board in making tough decisions. What the Board needs is FACTS, more specifically detailed FACTS. Therefore, I believe that the following text needs to be added to our consensus position. "Any consensus or other formally supported position from an ICANN Advisory Committee or ICANN Supporting Organization must document the position of each member within that committee or organization (i.e. support, opposition, abstention) in compliance with both the spirit and letter of the ICANN bylaws regarding openness and transparency." Best regards, Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-gnso-contro-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-contro-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 10:54 AM To: Controversial TLDs Subject: [gnso-contro-wg] final Draft - rev 04 hi, I have made the changes i know about at this point. Change marking is on. Please send the list any comments. if there are any open issues please list them. we can either quickly come to agreement on the list or i will list them as pending issues to be discussed in the full group. I plan to send a version to the full RN group sometime tonight. thanks a.