RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] outstanding issues
- To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] outstanding issues
- From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:34:48 -0400
At 07/04/2009 12:08 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
if the SGs are just paper constructs then it means nothing to be in one
house versus the other except for voting.
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
I don't see how debates in SG matter in this case, since the NCA sits
at the HOUSE level. And I have heard little discussion that anyone is
seriously considering having debates or deliberations at the house level.
At 07/04/2009 01:53 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
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.
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.
NCAs are there, at least partly, to be a balance and do not have to
agree with those in their house. Moreover, I don't think that we are
giving NCAs enough credit. Although not an NCA to the GNSO, I was
dropped into the GNSO a few years ago with pretty much no specific
knowledge of the various issues or players. In the following months
and years, I have learned a LOT about registrars and registries and
the issues important to the various non-contracted constituencies.
Just being on Council and semi-conscious provides a lot of that,
coupled with one-on-one dialogues. I think that anyone who is going
to be successful as a NCA is going to have to work hard to understand
the issues, and not just those of the house (or no-house) that they
are sitting with.
For the record, I like the idea of rotation. If nothing else, it
removes the stigma of being a non-voting, houseless NCA.