Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Re: "Rules" for proposal-summaries and Principles-summaries

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Margie,

When we are discussing the summaries of policy statements of reference 
to the working group, are we discussing texts which are authored by 
Staff, or texts which are authored by members of the working group, 
presumably within the process of the working group?
If the working group is incapable of articulating summaries of texts 
which have external authorship, and the Charles River Associates 
International Report, the Nairobi Resolution, the texts supplied by 
Professors Salop and Wright, and DAGv4 all share this key 
characteristic of being the products of external authorship, it would 
be useful to articulate this.
I can't think of a supporting rational for this from the Working Group 
Model Team (WGMT), but I've only kept a cursory eye on that team's 
work, I'm sure Jeff Neuman is much better informed than I, nor can I 
think of a supporting rational for this from the
EricPolicy Development Process (PDP) Team (PDPT), though again, I've 
not followed this team's work in detail.
I can see the institutional rational for WG supporting Staff declining 
to offer interpretations of other Staff produced texts, or texts 
produced by third parties, the Board included, but the rational for an 
incapacity of a WG to state the relevant issues contained in an 
arbitrary text of arbitrary authorship and origin escapes me.
Eric