RE: [gnso-wpm-dt] Prioritization vs voting thresholds

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It may be the prioritization work will help us make decisions as to
whether or not to initiate a PDP at a given time.  Having that info
should help us to see the total work effort as a whole and thereby
influence our decision.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx
        Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 7:06 AM
        To: gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [gnso-wpm-dt] Prioritization vs voting thresholds
        
        

        Team, 

        the PDP working team actually working on voting thresholds
identified a potential interrelation with the work prioritization, see
following note:

        *       The WT discussed voting threshold 2 'Initiating a PDP'
and discussed whether a higher voting threshold should apply if staff
would recommend against initiating a PDP (not related to scope issue).
Most agreed that no higher voting threshold should be required, as it
would otherwise give staff indirectly a vote in the process. WT members
discussed the issue of prioritization and the role the current
threshold, which is considered low by some, plays in creating work the
community and staff has difficulty keeping up with. Some were of the
opinion that keeping the threshold as it currently is would be
appropriate. Others considered there to be a strong relationship between
this threshold and the prioritization effort the GNSO Council is
currently undertaking and were of the opinion that if there is no
effective prioritization this threshold may need to be raised in order
to avoid GNSO community and staff overload. It was agreed to put this
issue to the mailing list for further input. 
                

        I would welcome your comments as input for further discussion in
the PDP working team. 

        Regards 
        Wolf-Ulrich