Re: [gnso-policyimpl-dt] For final review - proposed WG Charter

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 7/2/13 10:55 AM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
> I think I would understand your comments better if you would propose modified 
> language.

OK.

I understand the question to reach into the process of the GNSO, so I
wouldn't have framed it (a) as a possibly-null-condition, and (b) GNSO
process independent. That was someone else's drafting choice.


What I understand the state of affairs to be, and of course,
correction is always welcome, is the Council may act, subject to
subsequent modification by the GNSO Stakeholders, according to the
processes of the Houses of the GNSO and their respective Stakeholder
bodies, on issues or controversies for which a timely act is deemed
necessary by the Council.


Having been involved in Registrar Constituency affairs as a
participant, and Registry Constituency affairs as an observer, I can
imagine either body expressly authorizing its Councilors to vote under
general instruction on issues for which a timely act is deemed
necessary by its Councilors, or expressly forbidding its Councilors to
vote on the identical circumstances, preferring to consider the issue
as a body, according to its own rules and procedures.


This is what I mean when I say, as I understand the question, it
reaches past the "issue" of "policy or implementation" to the very
process of the GNSO constituent bodies, individually and severally.


So my proposed modified language is a swipe of white-out, eliminating
the sentence.


The more laborious answer would be to start with the usual turn-around
time for the call-and-response cycle from Council to Stakeholders and
back, and then try and find the edge of impossibility of completion,
and on the front edge of that, where only insufficient time to respond
is present, and then ask for what gravity of issue, whether Policy or
Implementation, is a Council response, subject to later correction,
safe, and for what no later correction may correct an error, and
therefore is unsafe.

Given the remaining time, and the sleep cycle of the antipodes, I
don't suggest attempting the laborious answer, but some things are big
and some are small, and that and the time available to respond to some
query or challenge matter.

Eric