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

[Evan Leibovitch <evan@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 15 September 2010 10:21, Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> Although I admit that in many cases it can be blurry, I think in this case
> the line between policy and implementation is pretty clear.
> Policy is general - it is meant to apply to any case that comes along.
> Application of the policy to a specific TLD is an implementation of the
> policy. So the proper role in policy making is to define rules, generalities
> that are supposed to be applicable to every case.
>
> In that sense, what we are doing now is policy making. We are defining
> rules and procedures. Once the policy is ratified, and verbally defined in
> the Final Applicant Guidebook and embodied in a set of procedures, we are in
> the world of implementation. A new TLD application comes along, and
> generates an objection, and then goes before the board. That is an
> implementation of the policy.
>


The obsession with maintaining existing DAG baggage such as the DSRP have
dragged us into the discussion of implementation. So we are unfortunately
doing both.


   - "The Board has final decision making authority but should consult
   experts on the applicability of the criteria to the objection" -- *policy
   *
   - "The Board should engage a service provider to source the experts" -- *
   implementation

   *
   - "The experts should be versed on issues of morality, censorship and
   Ordre Public as applied to principles of international law" -- *policy*
   - "The ICC is/isn't a suitable source of experts" -- *implementation

   *
   - "A super-majority vote by the Board is required to reject a string
   based on government or community objections" -- *policy*
   - "A service provider will be contracted to handle the administration of
   incoming objections" -- *implementation*


My proposed wording for 4.1 was explicitly designed to remove implementation
from the policy.

- Evan