m.yakushev at gmail.com
Thu Dec 19 20:01:32 UTC 2013
if you remember, I also supported Xinsheng's proposal on prioritization,
and that is why I did participate in the poll.
However, I consider Brian's proposal very reasonable, and I agree with the
2013/12/19 Brian Cute <bcute at pir.org>
> I have been following the discussion on this point. Here is what I
> suggest and I am interested in feedback. ATRT2 adds a statement to the
> Report to this effect:
> "ATRT2 believes that these Recommendations are important and, to the
> extent accepted by the Board, should be treated as a strategic priority.
> To that end, ICANN should create an implementation plan and publish it to
> the Community."
> A few observations when considering this statement. It is appropriate,
> as ICANN continues to mature, that the organization treat Review Team
> recommendations that it accepts as strategic priority items. It is also
> appropriate to expect the organization to develop and implementation plan,
> publish it, execute and measure (with metrics, KPIs, benchmarks etc.) its
> implementation performance. Staff and Board have indicated that there are
> already some projects underway that map to Recommendations. That is a good
> thing. Mr. Zhang does raise a valid, practical point (supported by David
> Conrad). Are we asking ICANN to implement all of these Recommendations
> with the same level of prioritization and at the same time? This could be
> an impractical request. I would think that, in the normal course, if ICANN
> develops and implementation plan it will identify the effort and resources
> necessary to implement the Recommendations and that implementation of the
> Recommendations will vary to some degree.
> I think for all these reasons, the statement about may be useful to
> include in the Report.
> atrt2 mailing list
> atrt2 at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the atrt2