Re: [soac-mapo] Terminology DRSP

[Evan Leibovitch <evan@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 13 September 2010 10:32, Mary Wong <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  Perhaps it would be clearer if our report/recs made a distinction between
> the "experts" who would be consulted/appointed to provide advice to the
> Board about a filed objection, and the "DRSP" (if any) who may be the agency
> outsourced by ICANN to handle the purely procedural matters (e.g. timely
> filing, fee payments/refunds etc.).
>

Such a service provider is performing a completely administrative function,
then; it is not resolving anything. This is different from both the DSRP
terminology used elsewhere in the DAG process *and* it is different from the
expert panel.

It's my understanding that we're not here to tell the Board how to
administer the [objection classification previously known as MAPO]  process,
but to reshape its high-level design and criteria. Part of this design --
that appears to have consensus -- is that ultimate decisions rest in the
Board, not in any outside body. If the Board wants to subcontract out the
fees and forms collection that's not our business in this WG. We have enough
on our plate without getting into the details of how our recommendations are
being carried out.

To this extent, to use Betrand's phrase, it is over-engineering of the
process on our part to tell the Board how to pick its experts and how to
administer the program. It is enough for us to recommend that the Board may
choose to create or hire a panel of experts to assist it with *ITS* decision
making; it is totally free to choose its selection methods or to not even
bother with outside experts should it decide it doesn't need them., And it
can call the expert committee any old thing it wants.

- Evan