Re: [soac-mapo] Board chooses to duck responsibility?

[Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@xxxxxxxxx>]

The essence of the Board resolutions is that "we will skip community input
if it takes too long" ?   The Board, in the ICANN organizational model,
isn't *in spirit* hierarchically above the community. Shouldn't there be a
cross community statement to remind the Board that the decisions pertaining
to Critical Internet Resources are not intended to be decided on a corporate
Board model?


Sivasubramanian M




On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> I agree Alan, it is a strange statement. If "the existing process" means
> the Draft Applicant Guidebook (DAGv4), then DAGv4 is an implementation
> document and our Terms of Reference clearly stated that we were supposed to
> alter the implementation in ways that responded to the concerns of ALAC and
> GAC.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > What "existing process"? There was a proposed one in the last draft
> > Applicant Guidebook, but there is nothing currently "in existence".
> > And if we will only use parts of the CWG recommendation that are
> > consistent with the original proposal, what was the point of the
> > exercise?
> >
> > Alan
> >
>
>