[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
TWNIC(.tw)'s Comments on ccNSO AG Preliminary Recommendation on Policy-Development Process 15 November 2002 ccNSO Assistance Group had recently posted the preliminary recommendation on the Policy-Development Process at www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/ccnsoag-report-11nov02.htm on 11 November 2002 and call for comment to be made before 19th November 2002. TWNIC appreciate the recommendation produced by AG, and would like to make few comments as listed below: 1.Issue Manager plays a significant role in the Policy-Development Process. However, a clear outline of the Issue Manager is not provided in the ccNSO AG Preliminary Recommendation on PDP, such as the Issue Manager's position (ICANN staff or ccNSO staff? Voluntary base or paid staff?), qualification and work content. 2.In the Preliminary Recommendation, some key terms, for example supermajority and majority, in the voting process are also not clearly defined. 3.When the ccNSO Council votes in favour of convening a task force, is there any financial support required to the appointed task force? Will the task force work on a voluntary basis? Or will there be any budget allocated to support the task force's work in order to ensure efficiency and motivation? We understand, as AG proceeds with drafting recommendations on structure of the ccNSO and ccNSO Council, some of the concerns will be cleared-up. It is hoped that our concerns will be considered in order to build a feasible, efficient and sound mechanism for the ccTLD community. Vincent WS Chen Executive Director of TWNIC [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] |