[CWG-DT-Stewardship] Update from the GNSO and draft call for observers for your review

[Gomes, Chuck]

I am not yet convinced (but maybe could be) that we should accommodate 'non-joiners' as you suggest.  I am not suggesting that they would formally have to join applicable groups but only that they would be allowed to participate in those groups' processes for this effort.  My concern is that it might greatly complicate the work of the CWG if there are lots of non-joiners participating as individuals while the SGs, Cs, etc. are participating via representatives of commonly situated groups.  How would we manage that efficiently?

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:57 AM
To: cwg-dt-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Update from the GNSO and draft call for observers for your review



On 09-Sep-14 18:48, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> I think unaligned observers could be handled in different ways.  One 
> way is certainly to allow them to directly participate in the CWG.
> Another way would be to have them participate via existing 
> organizations.  A third way would be some combination of the first 
> two.


I am comfortable with a hybrid approach.

In many ways it is best if these 'outsiders' can be brought into being 'insiders'.  And all sorts of outreach and co-option as you suggest should be done.

But there are also those who are non-joiners or are displeased with the way our insides are structured, who would prefer to remain outsiders participating as outsiders.  We need to be sure to be open to them as well.

avri
_______________________________________________
CWG-DT-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-dt-stewardship