Re: [soac-mapo] Another proposal for discussion...

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Frank for that useful clarification. I think it may also be useful to 
point out that many of us in the GNSO (I'm only speaking for the group that I 
know, but I'm sure it's the case in other groups) are also subject to seeking 
approval for positions we take from our respective groups.

Although this is often clear at Council level, it is not always so for the WGs 
and DTs that people take part in. There, the line between personal opinion and 
group representation can sometimes get blurry.

So I think it is extremely useful, as you have just done, to point out when one 
is making a personal comment and when one is acting as a representative of a 
group.

Thanks,

Stéphane

Le 5 sept. 2010 à 01:04, Frank March a écrit :

> 
> I think it might be useful to make a comment on GAC processes because
> they are frequently misunderstood.  This is a personal perspective.
> 
> GAC members speak on behalf of their governments.  In a sense it is
> irrelevant what individual members of the GAC think or want.. They have
> to consult with colleagues in their respective governments, sometimes in
> other parts of their government who do not see GAC processes, let alone
> ICANN processes, as necessarily being more important or urgent than
> other (domestic) policy issues they may be working on.  Therefore GAC
> processes take time, sometimes a long time.
> 
> Further, the GAC strives for consensus.  This can be time consuming and
> frustrating and may result in the GAC appearing to take contradictory
> positions at times.  Welcome to the world of intergovernmental
> processes.
> 
> I think it a considerable success that the TOR have not held matters up
> within the Rec6WG.  It may well be that trying to find a Rec6WG
> consensus on a report by the end of next week that includes full GAC
> support is mission impossible. That does not mean that it should not be
> attempted, nor does it mean that the report would be less significant.
> What it does mean is that GAC members taking part in the discussions
> cannot guarantee that the GAC will not come back later with criticisms
> of either a Rec6WFG or Board position on MAPO.  Nevertheless, speaking
> for myself, I am broadly in agreement with the direction things are
> going and will say so in the GAC itself.  There is nothing so far that
> New Zealand would have a problem with.
> 
> Best wishes, Frank
> 
> ----
> Frank March
> Senior Specialist Advisor
> Digital Development
> Energy and Communications Branch, Ministry of Economic Development
> 33 Bowen Street, PO Box 1473, WELLINGTON
> Mobile: (+64) 021 494165
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Antony Van Couvering
>> Sent: Sunday, 5 September 2010 5:09 a.m.
>> To: Stuart Lawley
>> Cc: Mueller Milton; Konstantinos Komaitis; Robin Gross; soac-mapo
>> Subject: Re: [soac-mapo] Another proposal for discussion...
>> 
>> 
>> [replying to parts of the discussion that were off-list, 
>> redacted here]
>> 
>> It's not hard to criticize the GAC, but let's give them some 
>> credit when it's due.  It is a very good sign that some GAC 
>> members are participating here;  I am probably not the only 
>> one who would consider this a largely meaningless exercise 
>> without their involvement.  My quibble would be that there's 
>> not enough of it. 
> newzealand.govt.nz - connecting you to New Zealand central & local government 
> services
> 
> Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the 
> Ministry of Economic Development. This message and any files transmitted with 
> it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you 
> are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivery to the 
> intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error 
> and that any use is strictly prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete 
> the message and any attachment from your computer.
>