[CCWG-ACCT] The whois/RDS-RT bylaw vs. current activities

[Greg Shatan]

I agree with Steve as well.

Greg

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. <crg at isoc-cr.org>
wrote:

> Agree with Steve. Presently the PDP on subsequent rounds and the CCT
> Review are coordinating “live” in a rather efficient manner with calls
> between the leaderships every two weeks.
>
> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
> +506 8837 7176
> Skype: carlos.raulg
> Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica)
>
> On 28 Apr 2016, at 7:55, Steve Crocker wrote:
>
> Speaking for myself, without benefit of coordination with my colleagues on
>> the ICANN Board or with staff, my quick reaction is a PDP is not a
>> substitute for a review.  I do believe we have to find a way to be more
>> efficient and coordinated when we have multiple interacting processes, and
>> collection of whois and directory services activities is probably the
>> premier example at the moment.  We don’t have a solution at the moment, but
>> I don’t think equating a PDP with a review is the right approach.  In
>> principle, reviews start from a neutral position and assess the situation.
>> In contrast, policy development processes start with the premise that a
>> policy is needed and the bulk of the activity during a PDP is the creation
>> and shaping of that policy.  Reviews can lead to PDPs, but they’re not
>> interchangeable.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In thinking about the way the bylaws require the regular RTs and how
>>> those might interact with other processes, I'm wondering whether we
>>> think it would be consistent with the report to say that, if a PDP is
>>> going on about any topic that is subject to regular RT, then the PDP
>>> can be counted as fulfilling the purposes of the RT?
>>>
>>> It seems to me that this is consistent with the point of the regular
>>> RT requirement (i.e. ensuring that the review happens in a timely way)
>>> without entailing that we waste time, money, and energy in multiple,
>>> potentially conflicting efforts on the same topic.
>>>
>>> Have I missed something?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> A
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andrew Sullivan
>>> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160429/1667219b/attachment.html>