Re: [pdp-pcceg-feb06] Definition of Support

["Milton Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

Jeff:
I am surprised by this. It's a bit, well, let's say _impolite_ for the
registry constituency, which has a grand total of 7 (or it is 9 now?)
members to be interrogating other constituencies about their methods of
gaining or ascertaining "support." I don't see how implying that other
constituencies are misrepresenting their members' view contributes to
formulating a viable policy. 

As someone who has agreed with the registries' positions on various
issues at various times, I'd suggest that you'll get a lot more mileage
from arguing for those positions with logic and facts than by trying to
insinuate that the positions taken by fellow task force members are
illegitimate. 

Happy Turkey day, guy.

>>> "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx> 11/22/2006 7:34 PM >>>
All,

 

I have not been able to get the e-mails for the PDP group in the past
few days but was able to view the comments on line.  In response to
Avri
who discussed getting constituency "support" to replace the
"individual"
responses, the Registry Constituency has asked me to post the
following:

 

In preparation of Sao Paulo and the time and resources being planned
to
dedicate to advancing the work of the PDP Feb 06 Task Force, the
Registry Constituency requests the following information towards the
goal of defining

"support":

 

1. Was the position distributed to all constituency members for their
review and comment?  If so, when?  How much time was given for their
review?

 

2. What percentage of constituency membership participated in the
decision to support or oppose the position?

 

3. How representative of the total constituency membership was the
participation in this issue?

 

4. What outreach within your constituency's potential membership base
was performed and, if none, explain the rational of constituency
members
to not perform such outreach?

 

Not only are these the type of questions required to be asked under
the
ICANN Bylaws, but this type of methodology would add significant
creditably to any statement of support from a constituency (i.e.
"support" can mean a lot of different things depending on how
representative the process is within that constituency.)

 

Thanks.

 

Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & Business Development 

NeuStar, Inc. 
Loudoun Tech Center 
46000 Center Oak Plaza 
Sterling, VA 20166 
p: (571) 434-5772 
f: (571) 434-5735 
e-mail: Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>  

 

PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  The information contained in
this
e-mail communication and any attached documentation may be privileged,
confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and is intended
only
for the use of the designated recipient(s).  If the reader or
recipient
of this communication is not the intended recipient, or an employee or
agent of the intended recipient who is responsible for delivering it
to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review,
dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this
communication
is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in
error, please immediately notify us by return e-mail and promptly
delete
the original electronic e-mail communication and any attached
documentation.  Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is
not a waiver of any attorney-client or work-product privilege.