[gtld-council] Regarding consensus

["Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello All,

Having just seen Robin's post on the current draft of recommendations,
it is worth considering the following.

The output of the GNSO process is intended to be a consensus position.
This is essentially a position that no one individual, organisation or
constituency would create if it was in their sole control.   
However the consensus position should be a position that everyone is
willing to live with.

Thus the position is essentially a compromise between many competing
interests, and the objective is to at least make some progress.   ICANN
has been asked to consider a process for introducing new gTLDs for most
of its existence.

The consensus position is also not a "final" position.   To start with
the Board will need to consider inputs other than just the GNSO in
making a final decision, and it is expected that the policy will be
revised based on experience in the first round.

There is also a need to more formally develop the various objection
processes that should create more clarity on what constitutes
opposition.   A key component of these processes are that opposition can
be either on the basis of laws that are consistent internationally
(rather than a law in just one country) - preferably supported by
international treaty - or on the basis that an entity complaining has
some official standing associated with the string (e.g a .police, .bank
etc).   There is no requirement as far as I can tell that everyone in
the world needs to agree to a new string.    The decision to accept an
objection should be on the basis of an appropriate external panel that
it is hoped has the necessary legal expertise to resolve, as well as
balance rights such as freedom of speech with other legal rights.

So I would encourage people not just to criticise the current
recommendations - but suggest alternative language that is consistent
with the discussions we have had up-to-date.  Ie now is not the best
time to introduce a new point, but it is appropriate to suggest edits
that are consistent with the discussions held within the new gTLD
committee.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin