ICANN staff misuse the word "implementation" in order to avoid going through the GNSO for new policies

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi folks,

During yesterday's Registration Abuse Policies working group, the issue of 
“policy” creation and how it should be done properly came up.

http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-rap-dt/msg00206.html
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-rap-20090601.mp3

Fast forward to 27:10 (27 minutes and 10 seconds) of the MP3 recording and 
listen to the next 2 minutes where I ask Margie Milam of ICANN a question about 
policy vs. implementation. At 27:24 or so she says the ICANN Bylaws require 
policy work to go through the GNSO. But, at 28:05 or so she says “The IRT work 
is *implementation work.*” !!! She dances around the issue for the next 40 
seconds.

Policies *need* to go through the GNSO. However, ICANN Staff are describing 
*all* the new gTLD stuff as *implementation*, even though they are definitely 
creating new policy. Furthermore, take a look at the IRT’s full name 
“Implementation Recommendation Team.” Once again, this is doublespeak by ICANN, 
a way to circumvent proper procedures. These recommendations *are policy* and 
should be going through the GNSO. That would have resulted in balanced work, 
instead of the abomination and extreme report we received.

So, be watchful, as ICANN staff are mischaracterizing and deliberately calling 
things “implementation” in order to be able to do as much as possible in terms 
of policy creation in an unaccountable manner.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.leap.com/