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

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

But this is precisely what I fear, and think we should avoid: a high profile 
(read: politicized, xxx-like) application which actually meets all legal and 
ICANN criteria but which some government wants to veto anyway.

If governments’ expectations regarding the “role and status of GAC” is that 
objections are guarantees of success I think we have a problem.

--MM

From: Carvell Mark (IE) [mailto:Mark.Carvell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 11:43 AM
To: Milton L Mueller; avri@xxxxxxx; soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [GAC] [soac-mapo] Terminology DRSP (and more on Rec 2.1)


Milton
I would expect this to be an exceptional occurrence and in such a case the GAC 
members, the ministers and national communities which the members represent, 
would expect an explanation. I could envisage in a high profile case there 
being might well be political pressure on individual GAC members to account for 
an objection that has not been upheld. If he/she could not do so, the role and 
status of the GAC would be called into question - that is a poltical reality.

Mark

Mark Carvell
UK Rep on the GAC

----- Original Message -----
From: gac-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <gac-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>; soac-mapo <soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed Sep 15 10:36:32 2010
Subject: Re: [GAC] [soac-mapo] Terminology DRSP (and more on Rec 2.1)




> -----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.



_______________________________________________
gac mailing list
gac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure 
Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in 
partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On 
leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or 
recorded for legal purposes.