|
[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] |