Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] Naming the Houses
- To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>, <Gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] Naming the Houses
- From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 18:24:29 +0200
For the same reasons, I have a strong preference for the term ³contracted
parties² to remain the one used for the registrar/registry SG.
I too am often called to explain what ICANN does and more specifically how
the GNSO works. I have found that the ³contracted² / ³non-contracted²
differentiator is both extremely easy to explain and easily understood. IMO,
the reason for this is simple: it describes exactly what the situation is
between the two ³sides² of the GNSO.
Le 08/05/09 14:11, « Philip Sheppard » <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx> a écrit :
> There are two primary objections to "Non-contracting parties House"
> a) The world outside ICANN
> We are often too intro-spective when we discuss ICANN issues.
> For me, as someone involved for most of my time in non-ICANN issues I
> frequently explain to senior policy makers and CEOs what ICANN is about.
> Using language to describe a group such as "Users" communicates to these
> "Non-contracting" requires a detailed understanding of ICANN.
> b) Self-esteem
> As professionals engaged in a political and economic process we do not wish to
> be known for what we are NOT.
> We wish to be known for what we are.