Re: [gnso-osc-ops] Actions from 22 Sept/Next Call 29 Sept

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Dear Julie,

I must say that I tend to object to the way this is being put.  It is as if 
Staff has refused to comply with a possible requirements and is now suggesting 
that we change the wording to accommodate that refusal.

I think it is critical that staff meet the same requirements as everyone who 
participates in a meeting as was determined by the approved procedures, and 
that definitional spin on the word participant not be used to try and avoid 
such an obligation. 

As I have tried to explain many times, the SOI/DOI is not just for those who 
recommend policy, and GNSO does nothing more than recommend they are not 
decision makers, but it is on anyone who might contribute an idea that could 
end up becoming policy once it reached the approval stage.  Anyone with an 
interest who speaks in a meeting, or who writes a line a text, can manipulate 
the meaning and thus the policy and it is imperative that everyones interest's 
be declared without exception.

a.

On 22 Sep 2010, at 14:24, Julie Hedlund wrote:

> 
> Topic – Issue of Need for Staff SOI’s
> Action: Staff will draft language to attempt to address WT member concerns 
> expressed on the call. Focus will start with potential definitional language 
> changes to provide clarity on role of ICANN Staff and consultants not as 
> policy decision makers, but as neutral supporters of Council, Working Group, 
> Work Team, etc. efforts.
> Actor: Office General Counsel (OGC)
> Due Date: 29 September