[council] Working Groups for non PDP purposes

[Mary Wong]

Hi all, this distinction has been discussed in the Policy & Implementation
Working Group, which is currently beginning to explore possible criteria
and other processes that may be suitable to use when the GNSO is asked, or
wishes, to provide ³policy guidance² outside a PDP. In addition, it may be
useful to note that the current WG Guidelines are not limited to just PDP
WGs; as Avri noted, these WGs would not follow the Bylaws-mandated PDP
steps of Issue Report etc.

Cheers
Mary

Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4892
Email: mary.wong at icann.org

* One World. One Internet. *




-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Rickert <rickert at anwaelte.de>
Date: Thursday, May 8, 2014 at 3:26 PM
To: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
Cc: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] Working Groups for non PDP purposes

>
>Hi Avri,
>thanks for your e-mail - actually a good thought!
>
>Best
>Thomas
>
>Am 08.05.2014 um 20:40 schrieb Avri Doria:
>
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I happen to be re-reading the GNSO Operating procedures in preparation
>> for one of those newcomer webinars.  Always good to have a refresher.
>> 
>> I see nothing in it that prohibits us from creating a Working Group to
>> resolve any issue we wish to resolve, even if it is not a PDP based Wg.
>> 
>> So my question becomes, why don't we quickly charter WGs to resolve any
>> of these interrupt issues.  We can charter a group with a narrow
>> question, a time limit and the resources to make a recommendation to the
>> council.  That would at least give the council the ability to then take
>> a vote based on a bottom-up process that looked into the issue.
>> 
>> Just a thought. This could give us a basis to work on.
>> 
>> We might need some SCI assistance, not sure yet, to refine a couple of
>> points to make this something that can occur quickly, such as voting on
>> such a charter between meetings (the voting between meetings is already
>> request already pending in the SCI), but unless I am mistaken we have no
>> barrier to using our WG guidelines to actually get bottom-up work done
>> outside of PDP constraints and time tables.  Also, unless a WG is a PDP
>> WG, it does not need to include the various stages of issues report,
>> initial report etc.  It can go from a GNSO Council Leadership
>> constructed Charter, to an emergency meeting to vote on formation in
>> less that the gap between two meetings.
>> 
>> While this would not apply to creating policy which still requires a
>> PDP, it could well resolve issues of whether something was consistent
>> with policy.  And could certainly work on issues to do with governance
>> and transition.
>> 
>> Just a thought.
>> 
>> avri
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5033 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20140508/04339e4d/smime.p7s>