[CCWG-ACCT] Responses to Rafael's Questions

[Eric (Maule) Brunner-Williams]

James,

I want to point out that the existance and stability of the roles you note
has not been unchanged over time -- we began with a PSO Bylaws entity which
we no longer have, replaced (poorly, in my opinion) by a technical liaison
function, and real confusion over membership, improved (somewhat, again in
my opinion) by an At-Large Bylaws entity.

I also want to point out that there are issues for which  the gNSO and the
ccNSO are not, as you seem to suggest, independent, but for which the policy
interests of each coincide, e.g., our i18n/l10n choice of mechanism and of
local implementation.

We have struggled over the years with the problem that the GAC, and also
ALAC, have no structural means of participating in policy development (in
any of the SOs), and so are constrained to react to policy proposals.

Respectfully I suggest that nothing we are considering here "dilutes the
meaningful contributions of SOs, and (ultimately) converts every issues
into a dialogue between the Board and GAC/Governments".

Eric Brunner-Williams
Eugene, Oregon