Re: [soac-mapo] GAC Invititation

[William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi

On Jul 22, 2010, at 11:29 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

> Then comes this list, the idea of which was certainly never bounced off ALAC 
> before creation (don't know if anyone asked the GAC). Before this list even 
> saw its first posting there were 24 members from GNSO alone; hardly a level 
> playing field for a couple of GAC or ALAC members to wander into. Rather than 
> re-invent something from scratch and hope *they'll* show up, why not offer to 
> send some people into the ALAC/GAC conversation (really, a yet-informal 
> working group) that already exists?

As was mentioned at the outset, staff tossed up this list following a Council 
discussion in Brussels in which it was suggested that GNSO have some dialogue 
and recalibrate in light of the GAC position and in anticipation of the 
cross-community platform some GAC members said GAC would favor.  Since it 
wasn't the intention that this list would be that platform and we didn't 
establish a charter etc before people dove deep into debate, it's not 
surprising nobody thought to bounce it off ALAC first or invite GAC.  In the 
meanwhile, nothing has been done to advance the cross-community concept.  
Rather than asking GNSO people to join an ALAC/GAC conversation others didn't 
know about, or asking ALAC and GAC people to join a GNSO list others didn't 
know about and then dig through the archive to get "caught up" (which one 
imagines some government types used to different models of interaction would 
find procedurally odd), why not simply take the initiative to launch a new, 
"neutral" cross-community space open to all?  Unburden this of any process 
misperceptions, remove it from any one SO/AC's 'turf' and start fresh?  
Presumably Chuck, CLO, and Heather could figure out a mechanism...

Bill