Re: [soac-mapo] Terminology DRSP (and more on Rec 2.1)

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Well we are back to the discussion of whether such a decision is a matter of 
policy or not.  Where does policy making end and implementation begin.  
Personally I have always found this boundary fuzzy ad find that many 
implementation decisions are indeed policy making decisions.  In fact isn't the 
issue of this entire group such an instance - i.e we are discussing the policy 
implications of an implementation plan.

The Bylaws refer to 'public policy matters'.  I doubt we are in a position to 
define the decision on allowing or prohibiting a name as not being a 'public 
policy matter' that either the GAC or the ALAC may have an opinion on.

But perhaps I am wrong and the GAC ad ALAC do not consider such decisions 
public policy matters.

a.

On 15 Sep 2010, at 12:36, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> 
>> with the assumption that if the appellant is either the GAC or ALAC, the
>> board would then discuss their decision with them as required in the
>> bylaw currently for GAC should they be requested to do so by the AC.
>> 
> 
> I do not agree with that. The GAC has input rights and a "right to get an 
> explanation of why the Board diverged from its advice" with respect to POLICY 
> MAKING, not implementations. Individual TLD decisions are implementations of 
> a policy, not a policy.
> So I neither GAC nor ALAC is entitled to some kind of an explanation if they 
> forward an objection and it is not upheld. Moreover, please note the capacity 
> burden this would place on the Board and staff if there are a lot of 
> objections. 
> 
>