[CWG-Stewardship] Principles: Capture
Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk
Tue Jan 6 08:11:33 UTC 2015
Thanks Alan, that is helpful.
Just so I am sure that I understand the implications correctly, what we are saying is that there needs to be a positive engagement to support any particular outcome or decision or direction of travel. Limited response and abstentions (unless because of conflict of interest, I suppose) would be a measure of capture.
Obviously the principles are not the place to set markers, but your draft footnote would at least give a measureable basis for capture that might need to be addressed in the final proposal.
Thanks for your proposal. I'd welcome any comments on it from other participants or members of the CWG.
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: 06 January 2015 02:13
To: CWG Stewardship
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles: Capture
A long time ago, I said I would come up with a footnote for the Principles document that defined Capture.
"A group can be considered captured when one or more stakeholders are able to effectively control outcomes despite lack of agreement from other stakeholders who nominally should be able to drive consensus.
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
More information about the CWG-Stewardship