[Date Prev]   [Date Next]   [Thread Prev]   [Thread Next]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]

Comment ccNSOAG3:
  • To: <reform-comments@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Comment ccNSOAG3:
  • From: "Vincent WS Chen" <wschen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 23:57:44 +0800
  • Importance: Normal
  • Organization: twnic
  • Reply-to: <wschen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

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
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
   Recommendation on PDP, such as the Issue Manager's position (ICANN
staff or 
   ccNSO staff? Voluntary base or paid staff?), qualification and work
2.In the Preliminary Recommendation, some key terms, for example
   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
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]

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy