Re: [soac-mapo] Exchange of letters between GAC and ICANN re: morality issues

[Jon Nevett <jon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Nov 29, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Konstantinos Komaitis wrote:

> I understand that the role of CWG is not to create policy, but surely the 
> conclusions of such working groups should be acknowledged and deliberated by 
> ICANN and its staff. 


Konstantinos:

I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment here and your concern that folks 
would not want to serve on these groups if the output would be ignored by 
ICANN.  In the case of our group, however, I think that ICANN and its staff did 
exactly what you suggest.  ICANN published a 36-page paper acknowledging our 
work and providing a response and rationale to each of our recommendations (see 
http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explanatory-memo-morality-public-order-12nov10-en.pdf).
  They provided a detailed response for the recommendations that were accepted 
and for those that were not accepted or questioned.  Just because ICANN doesn't 
follow certain input does not mean that the input was ignored.  

I also agree with Bertrand that we should work on a model for future groups 
like ours.  It would be shame not to.

Best,

Jon