[gnso-ff-pdp-may08] On the basic process question for the gnso-ff-pdp-May08@xxxxxxxxx working group

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

All,

Dave mentioned that honestly reporting a problem with the process would 
be somehow bad for the GNSO. I don't know why he thinks so, and I think 
pretending that there isn't a problem with the process is a really poor 
choice. When I brought this matter up several weeks ago to Avri and 
Chuck, the current chair and co-chair of the GNSO, concealing the nature 
and scope of the problem was not what they wanted, and as ICANN shifts 
from a legislative GNSO to a managerial GNSO, with tasks undertaken by 
working groups such as this one, regardless of Avri's or Chuck's views, 
it is not what I want. Reform isn't if we have to lie about it.
So I disagree with Dave on the question of cover-up.

There are some who want to "accept the charter and set questions as is" 
and some who want to "recharter and defer and/or revise the set questions".
That appears to be the fact situation. Both points of view have been 
explored in detail, and while the "recharter" position does not preclude 
answering questions, the "accept" position does preclude answering any 
questions other than those set, however perfect or imperfect.
Note I've copied both Avri and Chuck in.

Eric