Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Draft Motion for GNSO

[Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'm supportive of this approach Alan  but  but when would new drafting of
the motion be able to be done?  is it going to make any GNSO
deadline required for it ?


Cheryl Langdon-Orr
(CLO)



On 14 June 2011 23:59, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I am attaching the motion which Marika drafted. She passed it by me and
> after a cursory look at it said it was ok. On further consideration, I see
> that I did not look at it carefully enough.
>
> Specifically, I did not notice that the motion divided the Recommendations
> into several groups, only one of which is to be sent to the Board for their
> approval.
>
> I strongly feel that the entire set of recommendations should be passed to
> the Board.
>
> Recommendation 17 (Registrars must point to new education material) in
> particular *MUST* go to the Board as it was the intent that this become part
> of the RAA, just as the current Registrant Rights and Responsibilities
> document was included in the last RAA revision.
>
> Recommendation 16 (develop education material) and 18 (compliance follow-up
> and reporting) request ICANN Staff action, and the should have the weight of
> the Board accepting them to ensure that the work is funded and done.
>
> And I believe that for consistency, Recommendations 10, 11 and 12 (Best
> Practices) should go to the Board as well, although that is of less import.
>
> Alan