[bc-gnso] Working Group Guidelines -- withdrawing the draft

[Ron Andruff]

Mikey,

Don't be too quick to withdraw this document.  Others may still want to
weigh in on this matter before the deadline...

My position on the three 'contentious' elements that have been raised are as
follows:

(1) I agree that the candidates for Chair of a WG be as broad as possible.
I understand the concerns about capture, but feel that with 'Chair training'
that will be part of the toolkit, this issue is of lesser concern.

(2) I agree that Liaisons should be able to act fully in the WG's, but in
like manner as they do not vote at the Board level, perhaps we can apply the
same rule here?

(3) Consistent participation -- irrespective as to how people participate --
is critical to Working Groups.  Therefore, I fully support the notion that
if a participant cannot fully engage, they should step back.  My experience
working on review teams is that many may sign up, but few actually
contribute, and fewer still show up for all the calls/meetings.  So I
support the concept of 'consistent participation'.

Kind regards,

RA


Ronald N. Andruff
President
RNA Partners, Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Mike O'Connor
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 5:46 PM
To: Mike O'Connor
Cc: bc - GNSO list
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Working Group Guidelines -- withdrawing the draft


hi all,

given the lateness of the hour (2 days before the filing deadline) and the
depth of disagreements expressed about the draft, i am withdrawing it and
will submit it as a personal comment rather than that of the BC.  

i'm disappointed that we couldn't have had this discussion several weeks
ago.  i think we need to tune up our policy-development process so that we
avoid this kind of train wreck in the future.

best,

mikey


- - - - - - - - -
phone 	651-647-6109  
fax  		866-280-2356  
web 	www.haven2.com
handle	OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google,
etc.)