RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] outstanding issues
- To: <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] outstanding issues
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 13:53:09 -0400
Please see my responses below.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 12:08 PM
> To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] outstanding issues
> On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 09:20 -0400, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > There is also nothing to stop us rotating the NomCom reps
> > through each of the houses and the floating spot, given that
> > they have two year terms.[Gomes, Chuck] In my opinion, this
> > complicates the learning curve for the NomCom appointees.
> i don't understand this at all.
Chuck: It comes down to how much understanding is desired relative to
the house issues. If you are satisfied with minimal understanding, it
might not matter that much. I obviously lean toward greater
> first, in terms of issues that are general in terms of GTLDs,
> contracts, picket fences, history of policy decsions ... ,
> the knowledge base should be relatively invariant regardless
> of the house.
Chuck: On general issues that is true. But will general knowledge make
for the soundest decisions? We probably differ on the answer to that.
> sure there will be house specific consideration but these are
> above the basic knowledge set one needs to have to be a
> useful and productive council member. when it come to these
> consideration, i see two
> if the SGs are just paper constructs then it means nothing to
> be in one house versus the other except for voting.
Chuck: This is probably true on paper and may not matter much in cases
where the two SGs are on the same page but it becomes more critical when
the NomCom appointee is a tie breaking vote. In the latter case, it
seems to me that a little deeper understanding of the house specific
issues might be useful.
> on the other hand, if the SGs have any sort of separate
> debates on the issues while figuring out how to decide on
> some issue, then having the NCA change house at midterm
> would actually help both their learning curve and the
> learning curve of the other members of the house as they
> would bring in considerations that could only be learned in
> the other house.
> and if we assume that productive and valuable NCAs will
> possibly/hopefully be renewed, for the apex of the curve is
> somewhere between .5 - 1.5 years (depending on the time spent
> and inclinations of the NCA), then when they approach their
> second rotation they will be in the long tail of the curve.