[council] Proposed Resolution re Domain Tasting

[Robin Gross]

I'm concerned that we are moving too fast with this issue.  I still 
haven't seen why this is such a pressing concern and I haven't been 
convinced a PDP is the right next step.   I think more work needs to be 
done to justify the need for a PDP rather than just assume that is the 
next course and hurry to get there.

Robin



Ross Rader wrote:

>
> presuming this goes down the PDP path, the council should attempt to 
> do so within the confines of the process outlined in the bylaws.
>
> not to sound critical, but why does this keep getting ignored?
>
> The motion should be amended to strike the proposed timelines and 
> instead use those found in the PDP as outlined in the bylaws. I'm not 
> in favor of assuming, out of the gate, that we can't work within the 
> timelines required by the PDP. If this is the case, then I'm likely 
> inclined to believe that we have too much work in front of us to 
> reasonably proceed along the timelines specified and we've prioritized 
> our efforts badly. If we have too much work in front of us, then we 
> shouldn't be voting in favor of every PDP request that comes down the 
> pike.
>
> Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for submitting the motion.
>>
>> My original planning for tomorrow's meeting had been to discuss the 
>> report at this meting and then work our way toward a decision on a 
>> PDP at the meeting on 31 Oct after the open comments.  Would this be 
>> acceptable or do you think we should vote on it as soon as tomorrow.
>> In any case, as things currently stand in the bylaws we cannot do a 
>> working group as the main vehicle in a PDP, but need to either use a 
>> Committee of the Whole or a Task Force.   We can create Working 
>> Groups for other purposes and as spins-off to investigate specific 
>> issues but until the by-laws are changed, not for PDP processes.
>>
>> Please let me know if holding the vote on this motion until the open 
>> meeting in LA is ok.
>>
>> thanks
>> a.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9 okt 2007, at 02.40, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
>>
>>> I offer the following draft resolution, taken from the Final 
>>> Outcomes Report of the ad hoc group:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Whereas, the GNSO Council acknowledges the Final Outcomes Report of 
>>> the ad hoc group on Domain Tasting, the Council hereby initiates a 
>>> Policy Development Process, and commissions a duly constituted 
>>> Working Group with the following Terms of Reference:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> 1. Review and assess all the effects of domain tasting activities 
>>> that have been identified.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> 2. Judge whether the overall effects justify measures to be taken to 
>>> impede domain tasting.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> 3. If the answer to 2 is affirmative, then consider the likely 
>>> impacts upon the Constituencies of various potential measures, and 
>>> recommend measures designed to impede domain tasting.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> This Working Group shall report back to Council by January 24, 2008.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> I am sure this needs additional language about PDPs, at least, but 
>>> thought this would be a good start for discussion.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Mike Rodenbaugh
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>