[atrt2] PDP Effectiveness Study

[Michael Yakushev]

Carlos, colleagues,
not going deeper into the essence of the problem mentioned by Avri and
Lise, I have to confirm, that GAC is seen as a very innefficient mechanism
by (at least part of) post-Soviet governments in my region. While a lot of
people, including those whom I know well personally, and/or who are GAC
members, do not share such views.
So, very unfortunately, I don't have my own answer to the question, what
exactly is wrong:
   the model itself (=> needs the revision of AoC),
   the interaction between different ICANN's bodies and divisions,
including the staff and the Board (needs certain intervention by the Board
and/or the management of ICANN), or
   the perception of GAC members or its current composition  (=> needs
certain internal decisions inside GAC)?
Maybe, it could be reasonable to discuss this problem separately.
Kind regards,
Michael

2013/6/21 Carlos Raul <carlosraulg at gmail.com>

> if everything you said is true, the absolute absence of GAC advice is
> enough to ring all the bells Allan!!!!
> If GAC is innefective, do we need another GAC model? GA without a "C"?
>
>
> *Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez*
> Skype   carlos.raulg
> _________
> Apartado 1571-1000
> *COSTA RICA*
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>wrote:
>
>> Lise,
>>
>> As I said in the meeting, if we cite the GAC
>> explicitly, we will also need to add whether that
>> any GAC advice/views were received in a timely manner.
>>
>> I did not call out the GAC explicitly when I
>> drafted this, because I was aware of the answer.
>> On the PDP process that we will be evaluating, I
>> do not believe that we have received any GAC
>> advice or even, had the benefit of general views
>> during the process. There may be some subtle
>> examples of views being known, but I can't be
>> sure. I cannot recal any intervention of the GAC
>> AFTER the PDP was completed and passed to the
>> Board where the GAC objected. Perhaps Avri has a memory of such an
>> occurrence.
>>
>> Note that the new gTLD PDP was before the period
>> we are reviewing, since it was a completely
>> different process, the IGO/INGO PDP is not yet
>> completed, and there has been no completed PDP on
>> Whois during that period either.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> At 21/06/2013 05:26 AM, Lise Fuhr wrote:
>> >Hi all,
>> >
>> >I think that Avri´s version changes the focus too much away from the
>> purpose
>> >of Jørgen's text, a purpose that it  is my understanding that there were
>> >support to at the conference call.
>> >
>> >If we only look at GAC's status as defined in ICANN's bylaws the scope is
>> >much narrower and we will not review if there are any needs to change the
>> >bylaws or other processes but only if ICANN is complying to the existing
>> >bylaws in this matter.
>> >
>> >So I find we should keep Jørgen's wording.
>> >
>> >Best,
>> >Lise
>> >
>> >-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
>> >Fra: atrt2-bounces at icann.org [mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] På vegne
>> af
>> >Avri Doria
>> >Sendt: 20. juni 2013 20:21
>> >Cc: ATRT2
>> >Emne: Re: [atrt2] PDP Effectiveness Study
>> >
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >I would be more comfortable with a more ICANN centric question, like:
>> >
>> >- Whether the views of the GAC have been handled appropriately given
>> their
>> >status as defined in the ICANN bylaws.
>> >
>> >
>> >avri
>> >
>> >
>> >On 20 Jun 2013, at 12:41, Jørgen C Abild Andersen wrote:
>> >
>> > > Dear colleagues
>> > >
>> > > Proposal for a new bullit between 86 and 87 (a 86A):
>> > >
>> > > - whether in particular the views and advice provided by GAC has been
>> duly
>> >taken into account given the specific tasks of national governments with
>> >respect to public policy.
>> > >
>> > > Best wishes
>> > > Jørgen
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > atrt2 mailing list
>> > > atrt2 at icann.org
>> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >atrt2 mailing list
>> >atrt2 at icann.org
>> >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >atrt2 mailing list
>> >atrt2 at icann.org
>> >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> atrt2 mailing list
>> atrt2 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrt2 mailing list
> atrt2 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20130621/fa6b7c9a/attachment.html>