[gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Rationale for Board Committee Resolution Posted

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

Thanks Margie.

I find the following interesting with regard to the rationale:

*         The committee was concerned about the public comment period not being 
closed as well as other process issues and yet the original Board decision to 
provide RC/IOC protections in the guidebook was done without following 
processes and without even a brief consultation with the GNSO.

*         There was also concern that implementation details had not been 
worked out and yet the implementation details for the Board motion in the 
guidebook were done without community input and that resulted in the flaws that 
the DT tried to address.

*         The fact that there was opposition to the motion should not have been 
a concern because that is often the case in such a diverse, multi-stakeholder 
process; more importantly, when the Board originally made its decision on this 
issue, there would very likely have been opposition as well but they didn't 
check.
A rationale that talks about GNSO process issues without discussing the major 
process issue with the original Board motion that led to this is seriously 
lacking.

Chuck

From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Margie Milam
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 11:53 AM
To: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Rationale for Board Committee Resolution Posted

Dear All,

Please note that the rationale for the Board's New GTLD Program Committee 
resolution on the GNSO recommendations with regard to the IOC/RC issue has been 
posted at:

http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/prelim-report-new-gtld-10apr12-en.htm

Best regards,

Margie
_____

Margie Milam
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN
_____