[council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform

[Philip Sheppard]

Chuck, Avri, Tom
you are right. I have written "partial support" either where the intent of the BGC is
unclear and we wish to clarify what we support, or where we go along with the BGC but are
adding a word of caution or clarification.
If you can think of a better phrase, I'm happy to use it. "Qualified support" /
"conditional support" ??
 
 
On the specifics of support to WGs.
I understand Council wants flexibility: going along with WGs for most cases but we may
choose other means now and again according to the issue.
 
The BGC report is written less flexibly and more reflects the by-laws NOT current Council
practice.
see opening to section 3 on page 12 (caps are mine):
"The BGC recommends that a working group concept becomes the FOUNDATION and FOCAL point for
consensus development work in the GNSO AND potentially for other Council activities."
This model would constitute an improvement over the the current system."
 
If we think that there may be at least one issue where we would prefer to form a task force
of constituency reps, or a committee of the whole of Council, (like we did last week), we
need to say this. The BGC report text does not seem to allow for this flexibility. Or if the
BGC meant it, they did not write it.
 
 
Philip
 
 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20071126/93cc9cfe/attachment.html>