<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font face="Arial">this makes good sense to me as well<br>
<br>
Ken Stubbs<br>
</font><br>
Marilyn Cade wrote:
<blockquote cite="midBAY104-DAV8CFBEA1539B782E836241D32C0@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I am fully in agreement with your clarification. I thought that was what you
were saying.
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>] On
Behalf Of Ross Rader
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 12:07 PM
To: Marilyn Cade
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>
Subject: Re: [council] Draft Call for papers, new gTLD PDP
I'm merely saying that we should not be pursuing a policy development
process unless we first have an informed, technically sustainable and
supported basis for moving forward. We should be spending significant
amounts of time fostering understanding, conducting analysis and
ensuring a reasonable technical basis. We should not be jamming all of
these activities into the PDP.
If there isn't sufficient understanding, technical basis or support to
move forward with a PDP, we should not be undertaking a PDP. To do
otherwise simply overloads an already complex and delicate process.
I'm not saying that these other processes have no place in our work, but
simply that they are different, distinct and separate. They are also
very important, valuable and essential to our success.
-ross
Marilyn Cade wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I am confused by this discussion.
One cannot develop policy without information and it is critical to
understand the "issue" before one develops policy. As the V.P. of policy
issues for the Internet for a multi national corporation, the policy
development process always included understanding the issue. J both from
a technology perspective and from a legal perspective.
I would sincerely hope that the Council would not take the point of view
that understanding issues and information gathering, to include
"opinions" and views of the constituencies, but not limited to that, are
essential parts of policy development.
Of course, there are those who think that policy is merely "opinion",
'or views', and that has always been one of the objections to policy
development. I am not a fan of the present PDP process because it is too
narrow and we keep having to "color" outside the lines in order to get
the data we need, the information we need, etc.
I would note that IDNs is a good example, as is the new gTLD policy
development process-of the need for more information, not less. Opinions
have to be backed up by analysis and by information. Otherwise, they are
merely opinions. When they are founded on analysis and thoughtful
consideration, then we are "making sausage" the right way, as they say
about policy development [sorry for the US colloquialism - in the
development of policy it is often described as similar to making sausage
- messy, but tasty when done right!]
Of course, we need to understand the issues - NOT merely the different
"points of view" of all constituencies and the ALAC, but the issues from
the SSAC perspective, from the perspective of governmental entities, of
the CCNSO, of the ASO, etc.
The Council does itself well, and serves ICANN and the community best
when it is thoughtful, informed, educated about issues and pros and
cons, understands the impact of a policy on the Internet - within
ICANN's core mission and core values - and balanced in its policy
outcomes. J That is policy that the Board can be proud of accepting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>] *On Behalf Of *Philip Sheppard
*Sent:* Tuesday, January 03, 2006 10:17 AM
*To:* <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>
*Subject:* [council] Draft Call for papers, new gTLD PDP
Ross Rader wrote: (the emphasis is mine):
The PDP is our policy development process. It is
*_NOT_* our issue understanding process,
*_NOT_* our information gathering process,
*_NOT_* our getting our technology acts together process.
Each of these is distinct and important, but we need to keep them
separate from the policy development process.
-----
I agree. This is an informed thought to start the year.
Philip
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>